Even after the foundation of this nation, we still relied on British (English) law as to procedures, definitions, citations (Until we had our own) and all the convolutions which so appeal to judges. Even in the recent "hand-gun decision", some of the arguments presented to the Supreme Court of the USA were those in British law or directly based on such. Why? Because the flow of such a legal system was towards one law for all under it.
The elimination of "benefit of clergy", sanctuary, trial-by-combat and trials before the House of Lords for peers all moved all of the Queen's subjects towards equality under law.
Now, Muslims have their own legal system (Sharia) inflicted on themselves for domestic case (Where Muslim women complaining of mistreatment have few, if any, real rights (Especially with the pro-Sharia cooperation of the Police) and the judgments of Islamic judges enforced by the British courts. Now, Muslim men are effectively beyond the reach of democratically passed domestic-relations laws binding on other British subjects. (Family pressures, with the usual Islamic threats of murder and beating, as well as that of police will insure that women "volunteer" to accept Sharia jurisdiction.)
I do wonder how long it will be before Muslims maintain a legal claim that their Mosques are secure from even warrant-based searches for fugitives and their stores of weapons.
For those in the USA, the Commonwealth and other nations with British based law systems, the degeneration of the UK's law away from "equal justice under law" should be a warning. For the British, it may be a sign that they truly need: A new government; A new Chief Justice; And, a new Archbishop of Canterbury. For the Scots, it may mean that even more serious consideration be given to disunion.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Left's Envy Of Gov. Palin
It is good that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel printed Ms. Ellen Bravo's anti-Palin column ("Palin: Is this good for women? No...; 7 September 2008; Page-3J; Please see below for "it") as it so clearly shows the primary motivation for the unfeminine-feminists attacks on Governor Palin, which is collective and individual envy.
As a group, those professional-feminists (As opposed to feminine professionals) envy the choice of the Republican Party, as opposed to "their" Party, to nominate a woman to the second highest elective office in the nation---With a very good choice of occupying the highest such office. (They might have predicted this after the appointment of a woman to the highest Cabinet post, that of Secretary of State, by the present Administration.)
Both as a group and, more certainly as individuals, those limited persons envy a complete woman---Successful in business, marriage, politics, family life (With some of the same problems and challenges which face real women), sport and spirit. Every word those empty critics write or speak reeks of jealousy of a better person, and woman, than they are.
There is, of course, a considerable measure of fear in such attacks: Fear that the American People will realize what a "real woman" is and elect her to the Vice-Presidency of the USA.
(The editors' descriptive note regarding Ms. Bravo neglected to mention that she teaches "Women's Studies", that most empty and artificial of academic non-disciplines, at UW-Milwaukee. Her poll of "friends" as a base for making conclusions gives some indication of the level of her scientific-academic thinking, which does not bode well for the academic reputation and standing of UW-Milwaukee and of the welfare of the students who err in enrolling in any of Ms. Bravo's courses. Ms. Bravo is, of course, fortunate that her mother was pro-life.)
Is Palin good for women? No
Her extremist positions are nothing like what women need
By ELLEN BRAVO
Posted: Sept. 6, 2008
Many pundits have labeled John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin for the vice presidential slot on the Republican ticket as an off-message roll of the dice, based on a hasty vetting. In fact, it was probably the most calculated political move he’s made.
101157Election 2008
DNC PHOTOS
RNC PHOTOS
Today's News
and Features
Long race becomes a sprint: Wisconsin gets attention as parties lobby to swing voters
Nader: Independent candidate campaigns at UWM
Deep bench: Republicans keep an eye out for 2010 candidates
More: Political updates from the AP
DC Notes: Police lobby for more Byrne Justice Assistance Grants
Today's Analysis and Opinions
Weintraub: Families get ready for their close-ups
Nichols: Small-town America is home for Sarah Palin
Roe: Is Palin good for women? Yes
Bravo: Is Palin good for women? No
Sunday Symposium: The Presidential Campaign
Blogs: Best of the Wisconsin Blogs
More Coverage
SPECIAL SECTION: Complete coverage of the 2008 race for president
Also see:
State Politics
State, Local Races
All Politics Blog
Advertisement
McCain has a big problem: How does a die-hard conservative who’s championed every failed policy of the last eight years (tax cuts for the rich, the war in Iraq, the power of Big Oil) win the presidency against an inspiring proponent of change? He can’t win by relying solely on the conservative base, and yet he can’t win without them. He has to keep his mantle as a maverick while assuring the Big Boys he has no intention of bucking them.
His only chance of victory is to appeal to women disappointed about Hillary Clinton’s loss, to white working class voters and to independents, without alienating conservative extremists.
Former Hewlett Packard CEO and McCain finance chair Carly Fiorina might have sparked some women, but she’d antagonize the conservatives with her support for abortion rights and for requiring insurance policies that include Viagra to also cover birth control. The evangelicals would have had a similar reaction to Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, both of whom are pro-choice. Mitt Romney appealed to the base but would have been a finger in the eye to women and white workers — another four houses to account for.
Presto! Sarah Palin, a woman who uses the language of feminism while promoting a staunch evangelical conservative agenda: anti-abortion even in the case of rape and incest, pro-gun, pro-creationism, anti-gay rights, anti-sex education. A woman who introduces her husband as a proud member of the Steelworkers Union while working to open Alaska to Big Oil. A politician who claims to be an environmentalist while denying that global warming is “man-made.” Someone who thinks that the war in Iraq is “God’s task.” A mayor who threatened to fire a town librarian who refused to censor certain books.
In the eyes of John McCain, Palin brings another big plus. The press has bought into the Republican talking points and cloaked her, too, in the maverick mode. Like McCain, she stood her ground on certain reform issues. But on all the big questions of the day, both Palin and McCain walk lockstep with George W. Bush and against the interests of women and working people in general.
McCain is trying to pass off Palin as a career mom who knows the difficulties of balancing job and family — hoping women won’t notice the ticket’s opposition to every measure that would ease those difficulties, from expanding family leave to paid sick days to equal pay.
The real question isn’t why McCain chose Palin, but why the media continues to give them both cover, pasting on the “maverick” and “moderate” labels as if listing these terms were equivalent to listing party affiliation and state.
Recently, I conducted an informal poll among friends, all smart, politically aware people who keep up with the news. A dozen of the 15 people I asked had never seen the clip of a befuddled McCain stroking his chin when a reporter asked about his position on a proposal to require insurance companies that cover Viagra to cover contraceptive products, reminding him that he’d voted against it.
“I certainly do not want to discuss that issue,” McCain replied. “I don’t know enough about it to give you an informed answer because I don’t recall the vote.”
Had that clip — or any of numerous examples of McCain’s other extremist positions and slip-ups — been played more than 600 times in four days, as the “Dean scream” was, today’s polls would be very different.
McCain is counting on women to be cheap and superficial about his selection. Even more, he’s counting on a docile media to be his ally as he tries to present Palin as a feisty hockey mom to distract attention from the pair’s extremist substance.
It’s high time for the public to meet the real John McCain and the real Sarah Palin.
Ellen Bravo is an author and longtime activist on working women’s issues. Her Web site is www.ellenbravo.com
As a group, those professional-feminists (As opposed to feminine professionals) envy the choice of the Republican Party, as opposed to "their" Party, to nominate a woman to the second highest elective office in the nation---With a very good choice of occupying the highest such office. (They might have predicted this after the appointment of a woman to the highest Cabinet post, that of Secretary of State, by the present Administration.)
Both as a group and, more certainly as individuals, those limited persons envy a complete woman---Successful in business, marriage, politics, family life (With some of the same problems and challenges which face real women), sport and spirit. Every word those empty critics write or speak reeks of jealousy of a better person, and woman, than they are.
There is, of course, a considerable measure of fear in such attacks: Fear that the American People will realize what a "real woman" is and elect her to the Vice-Presidency of the USA.
(The editors' descriptive note regarding Ms. Bravo neglected to mention that she teaches "Women's Studies", that most empty and artificial of academic non-disciplines, at UW-Milwaukee. Her poll of "friends" as a base for making conclusions gives some indication of the level of her scientific-academic thinking, which does not bode well for the academic reputation and standing of UW-Milwaukee and of the welfare of the students who err in enrolling in any of Ms. Bravo's courses. Ms. Bravo is, of course, fortunate that her mother was pro-life.)
Is Palin good for women? No
Her extremist positions are nothing like what women need
By ELLEN BRAVO
Posted: Sept. 6, 2008
Many pundits have labeled John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin for the vice presidential slot on the Republican ticket as an off-message roll of the dice, based on a hasty vetting. In fact, it was probably the most calculated political move he’s made.
101157Election 2008
DNC PHOTOS
RNC PHOTOS
Today's News
and Features
Long race becomes a sprint: Wisconsin gets attention as parties lobby to swing voters
Nader: Independent candidate campaigns at UWM
Deep bench: Republicans keep an eye out for 2010 candidates
More: Political updates from the AP
DC Notes: Police lobby for more Byrne Justice Assistance Grants
Today's Analysis and Opinions
Weintraub: Families get ready for their close-ups
Nichols: Small-town America is home for Sarah Palin
Roe: Is Palin good for women? Yes
Bravo: Is Palin good for women? No
Sunday Symposium: The Presidential Campaign
Blogs: Best of the Wisconsin Blogs
More Coverage
SPECIAL SECTION: Complete coverage of the 2008 race for president
Also see:
State Politics
State, Local Races
All Politics Blog
Advertisement
McCain has a big problem: How does a die-hard conservative who’s championed every failed policy of the last eight years (tax cuts for the rich, the war in Iraq, the power of Big Oil) win the presidency against an inspiring proponent of change? He can’t win by relying solely on the conservative base, and yet he can’t win without them. He has to keep his mantle as a maverick while assuring the Big Boys he has no intention of bucking them.
His only chance of victory is to appeal to women disappointed about Hillary Clinton’s loss, to white working class voters and to independents, without alienating conservative extremists.
Former Hewlett Packard CEO and McCain finance chair Carly Fiorina might have sparked some women, but she’d antagonize the conservatives with her support for abortion rights and for requiring insurance policies that include Viagra to also cover birth control. The evangelicals would have had a similar reaction to Joe Lieberman or Tom Ridge, both of whom are pro-choice. Mitt Romney appealed to the base but would have been a finger in the eye to women and white workers — another four houses to account for.
Presto! Sarah Palin, a woman who uses the language of feminism while promoting a staunch evangelical conservative agenda: anti-abortion even in the case of rape and incest, pro-gun, pro-creationism, anti-gay rights, anti-sex education. A woman who introduces her husband as a proud member of the Steelworkers Union while working to open Alaska to Big Oil. A politician who claims to be an environmentalist while denying that global warming is “man-made.” Someone who thinks that the war in Iraq is “God’s task.” A mayor who threatened to fire a town librarian who refused to censor certain books.
In the eyes of John McCain, Palin brings another big plus. The press has bought into the Republican talking points and cloaked her, too, in the maverick mode. Like McCain, she stood her ground on certain reform issues. But on all the big questions of the day, both Palin and McCain walk lockstep with George W. Bush and against the interests of women and working people in general.
McCain is trying to pass off Palin as a career mom who knows the difficulties of balancing job and family — hoping women won’t notice the ticket’s opposition to every measure that would ease those difficulties, from expanding family leave to paid sick days to equal pay.
The real question isn’t why McCain chose Palin, but why the media continues to give them both cover, pasting on the “maverick” and “moderate” labels as if listing these terms were equivalent to listing party affiliation and state.
Recently, I conducted an informal poll among friends, all smart, politically aware people who keep up with the news. A dozen of the 15 people I asked had never seen the clip of a befuddled McCain stroking his chin when a reporter asked about his position on a proposal to require insurance companies that cover Viagra to cover contraceptive products, reminding him that he’d voted against it.
“I certainly do not want to discuss that issue,” McCain replied. “I don’t know enough about it to give you an informed answer because I don’t recall the vote.”
Had that clip — or any of numerous examples of McCain’s other extremist positions and slip-ups — been played more than 600 times in four days, as the “Dean scream” was, today’s polls would be very different.
McCain is counting on women to be cheap and superficial about his selection. Even more, he’s counting on a docile media to be his ally as he tries to present Palin as a feisty hockey mom to distract attention from the pair’s extremist substance.
It’s high time for the public to meet the real John McCain and the real Sarah Palin.
Ellen Bravo is an author and longtime activist on working women’s issues. Her Web site is www.ellenbravo.com
Friday, September 05, 2008
Blame Not GOP/Bush For Unemployment #s
If blame can be assigned to the current, cyclical, unemployment rate it should be given to those (Especially the Democrat controlled Congress AND such newspapers which support an essentially open borders policy) who oppose the full control of our borders and mass expulsion of illegal immigrants. After all, such illegals as have been invading the USA cause a net loss to the economy, national income, criminal justice and other social costs, balance-of-payments very much in excess of any contributions they make.
Such illegal immigration costs US citizens (Who are among the hardest workers in the world) many jobs by direct and illegal employment. The costs to the economy also results in the exportation of jobs and the movement of employers to "cheaper" parts of the USA or totally "off-shore".
I sometimes wonder which congress-critters and newspaper publishers and senior editors have personal investments in those few industries who actually make money from the employment (And, often, abuse) of illegal immigrants
Such illegal immigration costs US citizens (Who are among the hardest workers in the world) many jobs by direct and illegal employment. The costs to the economy also results in the exportation of jobs and the movement of employers to "cheaper" parts of the USA or totally "off-shore".
I sometimes wonder which congress-critters and newspaper publishers and senior editors have personal investments in those few industries who actually make money from the employment (And, often, abuse) of illegal immigrants
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Logical Extention Of "Hate Speech" Laws/Codes
The ongoing Islamic attacks on Western Civilization (Or, what is left of it) is not limited to bombs-and-bullets. That attack also includes attacks on free speech and anyone's free press as illustrated by the copyrighted article reproduced below. Free inquiry, for all the harm it causes from time-to-time, is a better defense for civilization than the limits imposed by the mad-Mullahs or their front-organization henchmen.
If you think your newspaper or your favorite university or college is protected from such attacks, you have been out of contact with the reality of today's alleged journalism and of academic settings. In those institutions any, however politely reasoned, questioning or criticism of Islam will bring retribution or, much more dangerous, voluntary self-editing-out of such materials from lecture rooms and newspapers' editorials and news reports.
The same dynamic holds true, to some extent, as to other subjects such as: Affirmative Action; Human impact on climate changes; The limits of Darwin's theories; Demonstrable differences between men-and-women; The extent that racial differences impact on our crime rates and the like impact of both legal and, more specially, illegal immigrants on crime and other social charges; The role male homosexuals have in spreading STDs, TB and other diseases; The validity of "probability" as to on-the-street and in-the-airports evaluation of select persons (ie Arab and Black males, Ages 16-30 years) as potential threats to others; AND, too many like topics to list here.
If you support "hate speech laws/codes", you are most likely contributing to the death of free speech, a free press and academic freedom.
As far as the French (And Muslim) lawyers noted below: Tues-les tous! Dieu Redonnatdea les sein!
September 04, 2008, 0:00 a.m.
Eurotrashing Free Speech---NRO
How some Europeans and the U.N. are helping Islamists undermine freedom.
By Clifford D. May
In Europe, free speech may end with neither a bang nor a whimper — but with a lawyerly assist.
It was three years ago this month that the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published twelve editorial cartoons satirizing Islamist terrorism. Some Muslim organizations objected. Protests were organized. Danish embassies in Syria, Lebanon, and Iran were set ablaze. Dozens of people were killed. The cartoonists and their editors received death threats from such characters as Mahmoud al-Zahar, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza.
Kurt Westergaard is the artist who drew the most iconic and controversial cartoon: He depicted Mohammed with his turban turned into a bomb, its fuse lit. His message was clear: Here is how Mohammed appears to those who learn about Islam from suicide bombers. Westergaard is neither apologetic nor regretful. But he has said as clearly as he can that his drawing was aimed “at fanatic Islamist terrorists — a small part of Islam.”
Westergaard has required police protection ever since. Last year he had to leave his home after Danish intelligence learned of a “concrete” assassination plot. Earlier this year, he also was forced to leave the hotel in which he had been staying because he posed “too much of a security risk” to other guests and staff.
And then, in June, a “prosecutor general” in Jordan — a Muslim nation usually described as moderate — issued a subpoena demanding Westergaard face a lawsuit in an Amman courtroom.
The 73-year-old cartoonist does not plan to submit. He said that although it ought to be obvious that “my problem is with terrorists not Muslims,” people are free to interpret his work as they wish. “Disagreement is very important and if we disagree,” he told a reporter, “it does not mean that we have to sue each other and kill each other.”
Apparently, it is not only Islamists who find that logic unpersuasive. The English language Daily Jordan Times reports that attorney Osama Bitar, an attorney affiliated with the lawsuit (on behalf of the “Messenger of Allah Unites Us” campaign — such an inspiring name!) has been in contact with French attorneys who “have expressed their support for the campaign and its lawsuit against Westergaard.”
“The lawyers are studying the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the cartoonist in accordance with French and international law such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Bitar. He added that the French attorneys also are considering contacting colleagues in other European countries to file separate lawsuits against Westergaard.
Bitar enthused: “The idea of European lawyers joining us in the campaign and supporting our efforts is tremendous. We are defending Islam in a civilized way and are trying to hold those responsible for the caricatures accountable according to the law.”
Additional legal assistance may be on the way. The United Nations General Assembly is considering a resolution sponsored by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The ostensible purpose of “Combating Defamation of Religion” — yet another inspiring name! — is to stamp out “incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.” As for other religions, rest assured this resolution will guarantee them as much protection and respect as Christianity, Judaism, Baha’i, and Hinduism now receive in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any of the other sponsoring nations.
While General Assembly resolutions do not actually have the force of law, they provide diplomatic cover for tyrants eager to muzzle critics, and they are routinely cited by leftist “human rights” groups and journalists as though they were international law.
Felice Gaer, chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal body, says it’s clear that the OIC countries are attempting to “mainstream” prohibitions on any speech that could be considered critical of Islam.
“They are turning freedom of expression into restriction of expression,” she said.
And the European Center for Law and Justice has filed a brief with the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights warning that such resolutions “are in direct violation of international law concerning the rights to freedom of religion and expression.” The brief argues that the resolution is incompatible with any serious conception of free speech, that it substitutes instead “a subjective criterion that considers whether the religion or its believers feel offended by the speech.”
It’s encouraging to know that some Europeans are concerned. It will be instructive to see what they do when it becomes clear — as I’ll bet you a Euro it will — that the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights — won’t lift a finger.
— Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.
If you think your newspaper or your favorite university or college is protected from such attacks, you have been out of contact with the reality of today's alleged journalism and of academic settings. In those institutions any, however politely reasoned, questioning or criticism of Islam will bring retribution or, much more dangerous, voluntary self-editing-out of such materials from lecture rooms and newspapers' editorials and news reports.
The same dynamic holds true, to some extent, as to other subjects such as: Affirmative Action; Human impact on climate changes; The limits of Darwin's theories; Demonstrable differences between men-and-women; The extent that racial differences impact on our crime rates and the like impact of both legal and, more specially, illegal immigrants on crime and other social charges; The role male homosexuals have in spreading STDs, TB and other diseases; The validity of "probability" as to on-the-street and in-the-airports evaluation of select persons (ie Arab and Black males, Ages 16-30 years) as potential threats to others; AND, too many like topics to list here.
If you support "hate speech laws/codes", you are most likely contributing to the death of free speech, a free press and academic freedom.
As far as the French (And Muslim) lawyers noted below: Tues-les tous! Dieu Redonnatdea les sein!
September 04, 2008, 0:00 a.m.
Eurotrashing Free Speech---NRO
How some Europeans and the U.N. are helping Islamists undermine freedom.
By Clifford D. May
In Europe, free speech may end with neither a bang nor a whimper — but with a lawyerly assist.
It was three years ago this month that the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, published twelve editorial cartoons satirizing Islamist terrorism. Some Muslim organizations objected. Protests were organized. Danish embassies in Syria, Lebanon, and Iran were set ablaze. Dozens of people were killed. The cartoonists and their editors received death threats from such characters as Mahmoud al-Zahar, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza.
Kurt Westergaard is the artist who drew the most iconic and controversial cartoon: He depicted Mohammed with his turban turned into a bomb, its fuse lit. His message was clear: Here is how Mohammed appears to those who learn about Islam from suicide bombers. Westergaard is neither apologetic nor regretful. But he has said as clearly as he can that his drawing was aimed “at fanatic Islamist terrorists — a small part of Islam.”
Westergaard has required police protection ever since. Last year he had to leave his home after Danish intelligence learned of a “concrete” assassination plot. Earlier this year, he also was forced to leave the hotel in which he had been staying because he posed “too much of a security risk” to other guests and staff.
And then, in June, a “prosecutor general” in Jordan — a Muslim nation usually described as moderate — issued a subpoena demanding Westergaard face a lawsuit in an Amman courtroom.
The 73-year-old cartoonist does not plan to submit. He said that although it ought to be obvious that “my problem is with terrorists not Muslims,” people are free to interpret his work as they wish. “Disagreement is very important and if we disagree,” he told a reporter, “it does not mean that we have to sue each other and kill each other.”
Apparently, it is not only Islamists who find that logic unpersuasive. The English language Daily Jordan Times reports that attorney Osama Bitar, an attorney affiliated with the lawsuit (on behalf of the “Messenger of Allah Unites Us” campaign — such an inspiring name!) has been in contact with French attorneys who “have expressed their support for the campaign and its lawsuit against Westergaard.”
“The lawyers are studying the possibility of filing a lawsuit against the cartoonist in accordance with French and international law such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Bitar. He added that the French attorneys also are considering contacting colleagues in other European countries to file separate lawsuits against Westergaard.
Bitar enthused: “The idea of European lawyers joining us in the campaign and supporting our efforts is tremendous. We are defending Islam in a civilized way and are trying to hold those responsible for the caricatures accountable according to the law.”
Additional legal assistance may be on the way. The United Nations General Assembly is considering a resolution sponsored by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The ostensible purpose of “Combating Defamation of Religion” — yet another inspiring name! — is to stamp out “incitement to religious hatred, against Islam and Muslims in particular.” As for other religions, rest assured this resolution will guarantee them as much protection and respect as Christianity, Judaism, Baha’i, and Hinduism now receive in Saudi Arabia, Iran, or any of the other sponsoring nations.
While General Assembly resolutions do not actually have the force of law, they provide diplomatic cover for tyrants eager to muzzle critics, and they are routinely cited by leftist “human rights” groups and journalists as though they were international law.
Felice Gaer, chairman of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan federal body, says it’s clear that the OIC countries are attempting to “mainstream” prohibitions on any speech that could be considered critical of Islam.
“They are turning freedom of expression into restriction of expression,” she said.
And the European Center for Law and Justice has filed a brief with the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights warning that such resolutions “are in direct violation of international law concerning the rights to freedom of religion and expression.” The brief argues that the resolution is incompatible with any serious conception of free speech, that it substitutes instead “a subjective criterion that considers whether the religion or its believers feel offended by the speech.”
It’s encouraging to know that some Europeans are concerned. It will be instructive to see what they do when it becomes clear — as I’ll bet you a Euro it will — that the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights — won’t lift a finger.
— Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Obama & Election/Defeat By Racism
Some have claimed that, if Senator Obama loses the upcoming election, it will be because of (Only) anti-Black racism. In a pigs eye! If that were the case, he would never have received the nomination of his party built on more White than Black votes.
It seems more like that if he wins the November 4th election, it will be because of largely race-based (Racist), rather than issue-based, voting by Black voters.
It seems more like that if he wins the November 4th election, it will be because of largely race-based (Racist), rather than issue-based, voting by Black voters.
Inexperienced Vice-Presidents
The Democrats are making much of the presumed Vice-Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin's lack of foreign affairs and national defense knowledge. Perhaps they should reflect on the fact that their party's President Harry S. Truman was kept in the dark, by FDR and his Administration, as to the most important aspects of such subjects until he became President. The classic example of this was his not being previously informed of the A-bomb program and the potential of that weapon.
Perhaps, they should also reflect on the careful and ongoing training and preparation given by Republican President Ronald Regan to Vice-President George H. W. Bush, the later being also without much, if any, such prior experience. I suspect that President John McCain will wisely follow the later example.
Perhaps, they should also reflect on the careful and ongoing training and preparation given by Republican President Ronald Regan to Vice-President George H. W. Bush, the later being also without much, if any, such prior experience. I suspect that President John McCain will wisely follow the later example.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Which Party? Quiz With Answers!
Which US political party was the chief supporter of slavery and, after-wards, of "Jim Crow" laws and segregation? Which party led us into World War-I, after promises to not do so, and did so with an antique army, no air corps and a rusty navy? Which party led us into World War-II by arrogant diplomacy and economic aggression while our army had to practice with wooden guns and trucks-as-tanks? Which party led us into the worst war scenario (Viet Nam) we have ever entered and then micro-managed it into our defeat? Which party so diminished the reputation of the USA that the third rate theocracy of Iran could take over our embassy and hold many Americans hostage until a different party's candidate was elected president? Which party attempts to remove religion from its historical and constitutionally protected place in the public sector? Which party continues to support the Anti-Black, racist, program of abortion? Which party wishes to limit free speech by imposition of a speech rationing "fairness doctrine"? Which party continues to resist efforts to protect the purity of the vote by not allowing such measures as would block the dead, non-citizens and double-voters from the polls? Which party does not trust the adult, sane and law abiding citizens of the USA to keep and bear arms? Which party controls the Congress with its programs of pork-barrel spending, "ear marks", lower-than-the-President public confidence AND no programs to solve the energy and illegal immigration problems? Which party has failed to name a women to the highest elected and non-elected posts in the land?
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY!
Which party motivated the American People to insure that the Union was held together in the 1860s and began the liberation of Blacks in this nation? Which party supports true equal rights (Not special privileges!) for all US citizens (And, to the extent permitted by our democratically passed laws) legal immigrants? Which party (Generally) supports individual rights to the "free practice of religion", free speech, free press, full voting rights for all qualified voters and (As recently confirmed by the US Supreme Court) the right to keep arms? Which party's President-Elect frighted the mad-mullahs of Iran into releasing the US embassy hostages? Which party's president effectively ended the (First?) Cold War? Which party's presidents first defeated the international aggression of the genocidal president of Iraq, then (Upon his treaty violations) removed him from office and maintained the successful efforts to defeat international terrorism in that nation. Which party has had, as its highest non-elected official (The Secretary of State), a Black woman? Which party will nominate the first woman in history to the post of Vice-President(Other than the pre-doomed nomination of Geraldine Ferraro) of the USA (With a pretty good chance of becoming the first female President of the USA)?
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY!
Which party motivated the American People to insure that the Union was held together in the 1860s and began the liberation of Blacks in this nation? Which party supports true equal rights (Not special privileges!) for all US citizens (And, to the extent permitted by our democratically passed laws) legal immigrants? Which party (Generally) supports individual rights to the "free practice of religion", free speech, free press, full voting rights for all qualified voters and (As recently confirmed by the US Supreme Court) the right to keep arms? Which party's President-Elect frighted the mad-mullahs of Iran into releasing the US embassy hostages? Which party's president effectively ended the (First?) Cold War? Which party's presidents first defeated the international aggression of the genocidal president of Iraq, then (Upon his treaty violations) removed him from office and maintained the successful efforts to defeat international terrorism in that nation. Which party has had, as its highest non-elected official (The Secretary of State), a Black woman? Which party will nominate the first woman in history to the post of Vice-President(Other than the pre-doomed nomination of Geraldine Ferraro) of the USA (With a pretty good chance of becoming the first female President of the USA)?
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Honoring Ted Kennedy & Minute Of Silence
On the first day of the Democrat Party Convention there is to be a special honoring of Senator Ted Kennedy. Perhaps, that event should include a minute of total silence to remember and honor Mary Jo Kopechne. Who? Did you forget? On July 18, 1969 Ms. Kopechne left a party of married men, including Sen. Kennedy, (Whose wives were not present) and young women with Sen. Kennedy and ended up dead in a pond while the good senator fled the scene and then attempted to cover up his responsibility for that not quite 29-year old woman's death.
It appears that "honor" has strange meanings within the Democrat Party.
It appears that "honor" has strange meanings within the Democrat Party.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Poll Tax VS. Right To Keep Arms
There was a time when some Southern states used a "poll tax" to exclude Blacks, Native Americans and poor Whites from executing their individual right to vote. Although the final destruction of those, very Unamerican, efforts was the enactment of the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, the basis of such a reversal in this and other civil rights cases was the "equal rights provisions" of the 14th Amendment.
In the next campaign to ensure full and individual civil rights to those Americans who wish to buy and keep arms, I suggest that the same "equal rights" precedents be applied in overturning those right-killing charges.
It seems to me that the very costly registration, registration application, special taxes on ammunition and "gun inspection" fees are all reincarnations of a poll tax designed to keep poor or "less rich" people from keeping arms.
We should all keep in mind that, even after the poll tax was limited or eliminated, some jurisdictions attempted to achieve the same results by administrating impossible to understand questions and those subject to the arbitrary-and-capricious decisions of the anti-rights examiners. We should take the position that American citizenship, the statutory age of adulthood and freedom from dangerous mental disease or criminal record should be the only test to keep (And bear?) arms.
On the other hand, perhaps we should enact a $Million per year tax on daily newspapers to be paid before they print editorials as a demonstration of possible limits on the Bill Of Rights that so many wish to apply to keeping arms or the "free practice of religion".
In the next campaign to ensure full and individual civil rights to those Americans who wish to buy and keep arms, I suggest that the same "equal rights" precedents be applied in overturning those right-killing charges.
It seems to me that the very costly registration, registration application, special taxes on ammunition and "gun inspection" fees are all reincarnations of a poll tax designed to keep poor or "less rich" people from keeping arms.
We should all keep in mind that, even after the poll tax was limited or eliminated, some jurisdictions attempted to achieve the same results by administrating impossible to understand questions and those subject to the arbitrary-and-capricious decisions of the anti-rights examiners. We should take the position that American citizenship, the statutory age of adulthood and freedom from dangerous mental disease or criminal record should be the only test to keep (And bear?) arms.
On the other hand, perhaps we should enact a $Million per year tax on daily newspapers to be paid before they print editorials as a demonstration of possible limits on the Bill Of Rights that so many wish to apply to keeping arms or the "free practice of religion".
Friday, August 15, 2008
The Limits Of Forgiveness-2 & Mark Shea
In his most recent "National Catholic Register" column ("Remember The Real Enemy"; August 17-23, 2008) Mr. Mark Shea preached to us as to "forgiveness".
It appears that Mr. Shea requires of us a greater gift for forgiveness than does the Church which requires: A desire for the Sacrament; Acknowledgment and declaration that what we have done is wrong and sinful; The request for forgiveness; And, some temporal punishment (Now generally reduced to a few prayers). Has the Church erred in this setting of standards? I think not!
The Muslim who takes pride in following the teachings of Mohammed to use murder, rape, genocide, robbery, etc. to advance Islam (And his own desires for sex and power) is far from meeting the noted preconditions for forgiveness. The atheist academic who takes a infantile and anal-retentive pride in desecrating the Eucharist has likewise excluded himself from the possibility of forgiveness baring some future conversion and redemption.
If the Christ whipped the money changers out of the Temple grounds to defend the honor of his Father, as Mr. Shea claims, then why should we restrain ourselves from inflicting temporal punishment on those who would, as Muslims, destroy the Church and subject Christians to slavery OR, as the noted professor, attack the honor of the Son? [If Mr. Shea wishes to follow St. Paul, then let me and others follow St. Bernard of Clairvaux who pointed out the need to sometimes use "the edge of the sword" to defend Christ and His Church. (1.).]
Mr. Shea's prideful preaching does, as Mr.Shea notes, remind me that Satan is the real enemy; But also that pride was his major offense.
(1.) De Laude Novae Militae
It appears that Mr. Shea requires of us a greater gift for forgiveness than does the Church which requires: A desire for the Sacrament; Acknowledgment and declaration that what we have done is wrong and sinful; The request for forgiveness; And, some temporal punishment (Now generally reduced to a few prayers). Has the Church erred in this setting of standards? I think not!
The Muslim who takes pride in following the teachings of Mohammed to use murder, rape, genocide, robbery, etc. to advance Islam (And his own desires for sex and power) is far from meeting the noted preconditions for forgiveness. The atheist academic who takes a infantile and anal-retentive pride in desecrating the Eucharist has likewise excluded himself from the possibility of forgiveness baring some future conversion and redemption.
If the Christ whipped the money changers out of the Temple grounds to defend the honor of his Father, as Mr. Shea claims, then why should we restrain ourselves from inflicting temporal punishment on those who would, as Muslims, destroy the Church and subject Christians to slavery OR, as the noted professor, attack the honor of the Son? [If Mr. Shea wishes to follow St. Paul, then let me and others follow St. Bernard of Clairvaux who pointed out the need to sometimes use "the edge of the sword" to defend Christ and His Church. (1.).]
Mr. Shea's prideful preaching does, as Mr.Shea notes, remind me that Satan is the real enemy; But also that pride was his major offense.
(1.) De Laude Novae Militae
Thursday, August 14, 2008
In Defense Of Atomic Energy
The letter below was sent to Milwaukee's "alternative", weekly and far left newspaper in response to a column opposing atomic energy plants.
2321 South 82 Street
West Allis, WI 53219
545-1884
TO THE EDITORS, THE SHEPHERD EXPRESS:
Being an honest conservative I do read the columns in your paper with the intent of balancing out input from other, much more "right wing", sources. Who knows? Someday, I might find myself or my sources in error and change my views and resultant actions (eg Voting).
Yet, Mr. Joel McNally's ongoing parade of ignorance as to almost any subject he discusses has done nothing to encourage my ongoing efforts to view the world and its people in a fair way.
In your most recent (August 14-20, 2008) issue Mr. McNally's "Croaking Canaries" presents his considerable (Paraphrased quote) "subtraction from the sum-total of human knowledge" in the areas of terrorism and of nuclear-power engineering.
Your readers, editors and (Most specially) Mr. McNally should remember the following.
1. The movie "The China Syndrome" was fiction and should not be put up as an example
for discussion of scientific or engineering topics any more than the radical and
unqualified exponents of the "twin towers as USA sponsored sabotage" fools should
override the best engineering minds of this and other nations.
2. The Chernobyl (The Ukraine) nuclear disaster was an almost classic example of
SOCIALIST engineering, design, lack-of-proper-controls and bureaucratic stupidity
considered inferior even at that time.
3. The Three Mile Island incident probably released less radiation than too many the coal powered power plants do today.
4. I have not read Mr. John Fuller's "We Almost Lost Detroit"; But, that author's prior
dedication to the supernatural and space-aliens (And lack of apparent engineering
background) leads me to wonder why anyone would use that as a base-line for a
reasoned discussion of nuclear power plants. {We still have Detroit--Damm it!]
5. The engineering of modern nuclear power plants (In such places as Japan and France) do allow of minor fires and, perhaps, very minor radiation leaks----Which have all been quickly and safely contained.
6. The nature of such plants' reactor vessels are now such that I doubt that even a "9/11"style Islamic terrorist attack would crack them and cause a melt-down.
7. The real and acknowledged great terrorist attack targets are oil refineries and, mostof all, those ships which move Liquid Petroleum Gas on the seas and into our ports.
8. As a practical matter, the real terrorist threats are: The level of violent Black-on-Black crimes in most urban settings; The growth in power of largely Latino gangs flowing out of Latin-America, through California and into the rest of the USA; And, the instant jihads of such Muslims who suddenly decide to attack "the unbelievers" as Mohammed Taheri-Azar who has been convicted of attempted murder by his driving a sports-utility vehicle into a crowd at the UNC campus OR the highly educated and well paid Muslim doctors who attempted to blow up the Glasgow (Scotland)
air port.
I do look forward for your many well written (If far "to the left") columns; But, find Mr. McNally's deviation from reality well beyond even my tolerance.
Sincerely yours,
James Pawlak
PS---As usual, please do forward this note to Mr. McNally, along with a book on
engineering principles and instructions for self first aid in case of stroke.
2321 South 82 Street
West Allis, WI 53219
545-1884
TO THE EDITORS, THE SHEPHERD EXPRESS:
Being an honest conservative I do read the columns in your paper with the intent of balancing out input from other, much more "right wing", sources. Who knows? Someday, I might find myself or my sources in error and change my views and resultant actions (eg Voting).
Yet, Mr. Joel McNally's ongoing parade of ignorance as to almost any subject he discusses has done nothing to encourage my ongoing efforts to view the world and its people in a fair way.
In your most recent (August 14-20, 2008) issue Mr. McNally's "Croaking Canaries" presents his considerable (Paraphrased quote) "subtraction from the sum-total of human knowledge" in the areas of terrorism and of nuclear-power engineering.
Your readers, editors and (Most specially) Mr. McNally should remember the following.
1. The movie "The China Syndrome" was fiction and should not be put up as an example
for discussion of scientific or engineering topics any more than the radical and
unqualified exponents of the "twin towers as USA sponsored sabotage" fools should
override the best engineering minds of this and other nations.
2. The Chernobyl (The Ukraine) nuclear disaster was an almost classic example of
SOCIALIST engineering, design, lack-of-proper-controls and bureaucratic stupidity
considered inferior even at that time.
3. The Three Mile Island incident probably released less radiation than too many the coal powered power plants do today.
4. I have not read Mr. John Fuller's "We Almost Lost Detroit"; But, that author's prior
dedication to the supernatural and space-aliens (And lack of apparent engineering
background) leads me to wonder why anyone would use that as a base-line for a
reasoned discussion of nuclear power plants. {We still have Detroit--Damm it!]
5. The engineering of modern nuclear power plants (In such places as Japan and France) do allow of minor fires and, perhaps, very minor radiation leaks----Which have all been quickly and safely contained.
6. The nature of such plants' reactor vessels are now such that I doubt that even a "9/11"style Islamic terrorist attack would crack them and cause a melt-down.
7. The real and acknowledged great terrorist attack targets are oil refineries and, mostof all, those ships which move Liquid Petroleum Gas on the seas and into our ports.
8. As a practical matter, the real terrorist threats are: The level of violent Black-on-Black crimes in most urban settings; The growth in power of largely Latino gangs flowing out of Latin-America, through California and into the rest of the USA; And, the instant jihads of such Muslims who suddenly decide to attack "the unbelievers" as Mohammed Taheri-Azar who has been convicted of attempted murder by his driving a sports-utility vehicle into a crowd at the UNC campus OR the highly educated and well paid Muslim doctors who attempted to blow up the Glasgow (Scotland)
air port.
I do look forward for your many well written (If far "to the left") columns; But, find Mr. McNally's deviation from reality well beyond even my tolerance.
Sincerely yours,
James Pawlak
PS---As usual, please do forward this note to Mr. McNally, along with a book on
engineering principles and instructions for self first aid in case of stroke.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Letter To Sen. Obama RE: Race In USA
COPY
ORIGINAL SENT BY US MAIL
2321 South 82 Street
West Allis, WI 53219
(414) 545-1884
10 August 2008
Senator Barack Obama
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680
Dear Senator Obama:
You have said we need to tale about race in America.
Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.
This time real Americans need to have their convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. [You might compare the state of Blacks in this country with the political-economic disaster area which is Black Africa after White rule.]
MR. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up Blacks than White Americans. Untold millions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.
Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against White folks - with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance Black applicants over White applicants.
Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for Blacks.
It was, for the most part, White men who gave up their blood, limbs and lives to insure the slavery supporting South did not leave the Union and to enact those changes in our Constitution as gave Blacks the right to work for full equality.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude??
You have spoken about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Go to Altoona And East Lancing And Atlanta And Milwaukee and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids?
Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Are you aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Are you aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
We must now insist that the word “discrimination” be returned to its use to define the making of choices between what is good and what is bad.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
Hopefully yours,
James Pawlak
cc DNC---via US Mail
Senator Herb Kohl---via US Mail
Mr. F. James Sensenbrenner---via US Mail
ORIGINAL SENT BY US MAIL
2321 South 82 Street
West Allis, WI 53219
(414) 545-1884
10 August 2008
Senator Barack Obama
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, IL 60680
Dear Senator Obama:
You have said we need to tale about race in America.
Fair enough. But this time, it has to be a two-way conversation. White America needs to be heard from, not just lectured to.
This time real Americans need to have their convictions, grievances and demands heard. And among them are these:
First, America has been the best country on earth for black folks. It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known. [You might compare the state of Blacks in this country with the political-economic disaster area which is Black Africa after White rule.]
MR. Wright ought to go down on his knees and thank God he is an American.
Second, no people anywhere has done more to lift up Blacks than White Americans. Untold millions have been spent since the '60s on welfare, food stamps, rent supplements, Section 8 housing, Pell grants, student loans, legal services, Medicaid, Earned Income Tax Credits and poverty programs designed to bring the African-American community into the mainstream.
Governments, businesses and colleges have engaged in discrimination against White folks - with affirmative action, contract set-asides and quotas -- to advance Black applicants over White applicants.
Churches, foundations, civic groups, schools and individuals all over America have donated time and money to support soup kitchens, adult education, day care, retirement and nursing homes for Blacks.
It was, for the most part, White men who gave up their blood, limbs and lives to insure the slavery supporting South did not leave the Union and to enact those changes in our Constitution as gave Blacks the right to work for full equality.
We hear the grievances. Where is the gratitude??
You have spoken about new 'ladders of opportunity' for blacks. Go to Altoona And East Lancing And Atlanta And Milwaukee and ask the white kids in Catholic schools how many were visited lately by Ivy League recruiters handing out scholarships for 'deserving' white kids?
Is white America really responsible for the fact that the crime and incarceration rates for African-Americans are seven times those of white America ? Is it really white America 's fault that illegitimacy in the African-American community has hit 70 percent and the black dropout rate from high schools in some cities has reached 50 percent?
Is that the fault of white America or, first and foremost, a failure of the black community itself?
As for racism, its ugliest manifestation is in interracial crime, and especially interracial crimes of violence. Are you aware that while white criminals choose black victims 3 percent of the time, black criminals choose white victims 45 percent of the time?
Are you aware that black-on-white rapes are 100 times more common than the reverse, that black-on-white robberies were 139 times as common in the first three years of this decade as the reverse?
We have all heard ad nauseam from the Rev. Al about Tawana Brawley, the Duke rape case and Jena . And all turned out to be hoaxes. But about the epidemic of black assaults on whites that are real, we hear nothing.
We must now insist that the word “discrimination” be returned to its use to define the making of choices between what is good and what is bad.
Sorry, Barack, some of us have heard it all before, about 40 years and 40 trillion tax dollars ago.
Hopefully yours,
James Pawlak
cc DNC---via US Mail
Senator Herb Kohl---via US Mail
Mr. F. James Sensenbrenner---via US Mail
Monday, August 04, 2008
Catholic Church, Science & Universities
The most recent issue of "Discover" magazine contained the article "The Vatican's Secret Science Club", which "secret" appears to be more a matter of neglect or outright bias by the more general and less fair media. This article described the official and centuries old foundations of science within the Church. It does appear than no article, including this one, as to science and the Church, can proceed without noting the rare errors (Detected by today's 20/20 hindsight) made by the Western Christian Church in dealing with such philosophical or scientific dissenters as Galileo or, probably for his non-scientific endeavors, Giordano Bruno.
Even the author, the excellent Michael Mason, skipped over one of the great truths and accomplishments of the Catholic Church as to science and knowledge: That is its attention to logic and reason in Theology is at the basis of our scientific world as its schools of Theology, Philosophy and Cannon Law are the true base upon which our entire university system is built. No other tradition can claim such an effect on human life, thinking and civilization. The Islamic schools remained locked into the limits set by the Koran and the Hadith (The traditional sayings of Mohammed). The Eastern Christian Churches never developed the like of the University of Paris, Oxford, Krakow and other like schools, perhaps because of suppression by Islamic rulers or the East's suspicion of anything from the West.
Newton, Copernicus, Bohr, Stephen Hawkins (A member of the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences) and too many others to note here were all products of universities set in the traditional framework built upon the foundations set by and often funded by the Latin Rite Catholic Church or rulers committed to that Faith. After all, the only such university well sources of knowledge and thought outside of the Western World are copies of those founded in Catholic Europe.
Departing from the hard sciences, the worth that the Church places on each "Soul" (Person) and its application of that value to the study of law is the source of "Natural Law" reflected in our Declaration Of Independence and Constitution.
It may be that the described attention of the Church to science is only an adjunct to its declared purpose of the saving-of-souls. However, it does appear that reliance on science and logic is superior, for that purpose, that a commitment to Islam's sword or the goal of nullity of some Eastern philosophies.
Even the author, the excellent Michael Mason, skipped over one of the great truths and accomplishments of the Catholic Church as to science and knowledge: That is its attention to logic and reason in Theology is at the basis of our scientific world as its schools of Theology, Philosophy and Cannon Law are the true base upon which our entire university system is built. No other tradition can claim such an effect on human life, thinking and civilization. The Islamic schools remained locked into the limits set by the Koran and the Hadith (The traditional sayings of Mohammed). The Eastern Christian Churches never developed the like of the University of Paris, Oxford, Krakow and other like schools, perhaps because of suppression by Islamic rulers or the East's suspicion of anything from the West.
Newton, Copernicus, Bohr, Stephen Hawkins (A member of the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences) and too many others to note here were all products of universities set in the traditional framework built upon the foundations set by and often funded by the Latin Rite Catholic Church or rulers committed to that Faith. After all, the only such university well sources of knowledge and thought outside of the Western World are copies of those founded in Catholic Europe.
Departing from the hard sciences, the worth that the Church places on each "Soul" (Person) and its application of that value to the study of law is the source of "Natural Law" reflected in our Declaration Of Independence and Constitution.
It may be that the described attention of the Church to science is only an adjunct to its declared purpose of the saving-of-souls. However, it does appear that reliance on science and logic is superior, for that purpose, that a commitment to Islam's sword or the goal of nullity of some Eastern philosophies.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Shutting Down A Museum & The Past
The July 30, 2008 "Milwaukee Journal Sentinel" reported that Milwaukee's "Black Holocaust Museum" is closing, apparently due to a lack of financial and community support. Perhaps that is good. It is well past the time when such a pathological focus on the past, which cannot be changed, should be replaced with a focus on the present (eg Black-on-Black crime and the failure of Black families to educate their children in good manners and respect AND the accomplishment of those Blacks who are committed to education, hard work, self-respect and respect for others). It would also be well to consider a future where Blacks may become swamped under a flood of illegal, Latino, immigrants who care as little for "Black Culture" as they do for our immigration and other laws.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Learning From Obama In Germany
The following quote is from Columnist David Warren column of this date in the Ottawa Citizen (Canada):
"Germans should be quite disturbed by the spectacle of a demagogue who communicates with the public almost exclusively through mass rallies. Americans should be disturbed by what should disturb the Germans.".
For those (Majority?) journalists and others who act as if history does not go back more than one year ago, I suggest that they look up the name Adolf Hitler on their favorite "search engine", with special regard to his public speeches and their effect. For any, if any, serious journalists or other citizens I recommend the book "The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer, in which the reader will find parallels as to the Obama campaign. and may, if due caution is not exercised, obtain insights to both history and that very junior senator's campaign.
"Germans should be quite disturbed by the spectacle of a demagogue who communicates with the public almost exclusively through mass rallies. Americans should be disturbed by what should disturb the Germans.".
For those (Majority?) journalists and others who act as if history does not go back more than one year ago, I suggest that they look up the name Adolf Hitler on their favorite "search engine", with special regard to his public speeches and their effect. For any, if any, serious journalists or other citizens I recommend the book "The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements" by Eric Hoffer, in which the reader will find parallels as to the Obama campaign. and may, if due caution is not exercised, obtain insights to both history and that very junior senator's campaign.
Fanaticism---Of A Columnist
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Community Columnist Thomas Zachek latest subtraction from the sum-total of human knowledge was his recent "Where does religious fanaticism come from?" as printed on July 26, 2008. He attempted to tie together the terrorist actions of some Muslims, the illusions of a few strange people, the Spanish Inquisition (Operating in violation of Chruch Law and killing many less than the Catholics killed by Calvanists during the Thirty-Years-War), a very small minority of sex-offending Catholic Priests (Smaller than the number of like, criminal public school teachers), the Pope, Jerry Farwell and others as examples of a fanatic religious attacks on reason, civilization and the safety of human beings.
I will not expect him to submit a more fanatic attack on the anti-religious crimes as destroyed reason, mercy and millions as executed by such socialists and communists as HItler, Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol Pot; But, someone should do so to balance Mr. Thomas' personal biases.
What I do hope for is that the MJS will not print further columns by those who so demonstrate either a criminal ignorance of history or a like, offensive, willingness to warp and misuse its facts and lessons. (Unless the editors and Mr. Thomas are of the opinion that the First Amendment to our Constitution should limit only religious speech and actions and not that of columnists and newspapers.)
I will not expect him to submit a more fanatic attack on the anti-religious crimes as destroyed reason, mercy and millions as executed by such socialists and communists as HItler, Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol Pot; But, someone should do so to balance Mr. Thomas' personal biases.
What I do hope for is that the MJS will not print further columns by those who so demonstrate either a criminal ignorance of history or a like, offensive, willingness to warp and misuse its facts and lessons. (Unless the editors and Mr. Thomas are of the opinion that the First Amendment to our Constitution should limit only religious speech and actions and not that of columnists and newspapers.)
Thursday, July 17, 2008
My Speech To The NAACP
It seems unlikely that I, unlike Sen. McCain, will be invited to speak before the NAACP! Were I to so appear, I would begin my speech as below and as Mr. McCain failed to do.
"It is obvious that I am NOT an Afro-American. I am also NOT a Latino-American OR a Irish-American OR an Asian-American OR (In spite of my name and ancestry) a Polish-American. I am by birth-and-choice an American with a strong commitment to our customs, laws, lessons of history, common language and in all other national and common strengths.
I am proud of this nation with a special pride in its progress towards correcting its faults by the combined and democratic acts of its many peoples. O yes! The faults have existed and some continue to exist---And are subject to ongoing correction.
Of those faults, the early, national and international acceptance of slavery may have been the greatest. Yet, many thousands of Americans, mostly White, gave up blood, limbs and lives to begin the destruction of that system and injustice. Yet, my ancestors were not part of that problem in 1789 nor of that bloodiest war ever fought by the USA as they were, themselves, downtrodden serfs in the conquered and divided nation of Poland until they fled to this freer land about 1905. Because of that fact and my birth in 1938AD AND my very strong opposition to collective guilt; I cannot accept any blame for slavery nor credit for overthrowing it because of the actions or in-actions of my fore-bearers.
The remaining problems of the USA are best solved by individual actions. For myself, I treat every adult I meet as a Lady or Gentleman, with all of the courtesies and respect implied by those terms, unless they prove they are not worthy of such. In that case, I demote them to mere human-beings; Further misconduct leads me to consider them as critters.
Just beyond this principle and example, I suggest that the atomic or extended family is the very best means to begin academic, good manners and other forms of civilized instruction AND to maintain such throughout all children's real education and development. After all, many of us come from cultures where "She or he is educated" means that child or adult practices good manners and shows respect to those persons and those things which are worthy of that courtesy.
To solve this nation's problems we would best NOT go beyond these essential bases or, at worst, beyond the neighborhood or "village" with its churches, locally controlled public or charter schools and other pillars of society are only next-best; But, generally, potentially, superior to marginally responsive, money wasting, bureaucrat burdened big-city, county, state and national governments.
ETC. ETC. ETC."
This is the style of speech Senator McCain should have given to the NAACP and should give to all groups who continue to divide the USA by insisting on being "hyphenated-Americans".
"It is obvious that I am NOT an Afro-American. I am also NOT a Latino-American OR a Irish-American OR an Asian-American OR (In spite of my name and ancestry) a Polish-American. I am by birth-and-choice an American with a strong commitment to our customs, laws, lessons of history, common language and in all other national and common strengths.
I am proud of this nation with a special pride in its progress towards correcting its faults by the combined and democratic acts of its many peoples. O yes! The faults have existed and some continue to exist---And are subject to ongoing correction.
Of those faults, the early, national and international acceptance of slavery may have been the greatest. Yet, many thousands of Americans, mostly White, gave up blood, limbs and lives to begin the destruction of that system and injustice. Yet, my ancestors were not part of that problem in 1789 nor of that bloodiest war ever fought by the USA as they were, themselves, downtrodden serfs in the conquered and divided nation of Poland until they fled to this freer land about 1905. Because of that fact and my birth in 1938AD AND my very strong opposition to collective guilt; I cannot accept any blame for slavery nor credit for overthrowing it because of the actions or in-actions of my fore-bearers.
The remaining problems of the USA are best solved by individual actions. For myself, I treat every adult I meet as a Lady or Gentleman, with all of the courtesies and respect implied by those terms, unless they prove they are not worthy of such. In that case, I demote them to mere human-beings; Further misconduct leads me to consider them as critters.
Just beyond this principle and example, I suggest that the atomic or extended family is the very best means to begin academic, good manners and other forms of civilized instruction AND to maintain such throughout all children's real education and development. After all, many of us come from cultures where "She or he is educated" means that child or adult practices good manners and shows respect to those persons and those things which are worthy of that courtesy.
To solve this nation's problems we would best NOT go beyond these essential bases or, at worst, beyond the neighborhood or "village" with its churches, locally controlled public or charter schools and other pillars of society are only next-best; But, generally, potentially, superior to marginally responsive, money wasting, bureaucrat burdened big-city, county, state and national governments.
ETC. ETC. ETC."
This is the style of speech Senator McCain should have given to the NAACP and should give to all groups who continue to divide the USA by insisting on being "hyphenated-Americans".
Friday, July 11, 2008
Islamophobia???
The term or suffix "phobia" is used too widely and much too incorrectly in such terms as "homophobia" and, as to this note, "islamophobia".
As to the latter term, the following quote is applicable: "A phobia is defined in Webster's dictionary as an "inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of subjects or situation.". Fear of Islamic extremism and its potentially catastrophic consequences is not inexplicable or illogical. It is a rational reaction to dangerous, irrational people who would use weapons of mass destruction to bring about their apocalyptic vision." (From Joseph Klien's "Playing The Islamophobic Card", "Front Page Magazine"; March 5, 2007.)
I suggest that we all now substitute (In our daily use, in magazine/newspaper "Style Books", political speeches, sermons, etc.) the term "ISLAMOFORIA", where the term "foria" derives from the Greek and denotes a state of being-on-guard---Which is the proper response to Islam and all Muslims (Based on their "religious duty" to destroy our culture, government, nation and civilization).
As to the latter term, the following quote is applicable: "A phobia is defined in Webster's dictionary as an "inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of subjects or situation.". Fear of Islamic extremism and its potentially catastrophic consequences is not inexplicable or illogical. It is a rational reaction to dangerous, irrational people who would use weapons of mass destruction to bring about their apocalyptic vision." (From Joseph Klien's "Playing The Islamophobic Card", "Front Page Magazine"; March 5, 2007.)
I suggest that we all now substitute (In our daily use, in magazine/newspaper "Style Books", political speeches, sermons, etc.) the term "ISLAMOFORIA", where the term "foria" derives from the Greek and denotes a state of being-on-guard---Which is the proper response to Islam and all Muslims (Based on their "religious duty" to destroy our culture, government, nation and civilization).
Tuesday, July 08, 2008
Conditional Support For "Fairness Doctrine"
I could (As a conservative and strict constitutionlist) bring myself to support a First Amendment violating "Fairness Doctrine" if, and only if the following conditions are first met:
1. That the broadcast media part of this process be first tried out, for a minimum of three years on NPR and all publicly owned broadcast operations which use the public airways; AND,
2. As newspapers use the public roads (Paid for by all tax payers) to distribute their editions, the editorials of all daily newspapers be subjected to the same three-year test---Before it is inflicted on magazines or "talk show radio"
Should I hold my breath for such conditions?
1. That the broadcast media part of this process be first tried out, for a minimum of three years on NPR and all publicly owned broadcast operations which use the public airways; AND,
2. As newspapers use the public roads (Paid for by all tax payers) to distribute their editions, the editorials of all daily newspapers be subjected to the same three-year test---Before it is inflicted on magazines or "talk show radio"
Should I hold my breath for such conditions?
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
"If" & Senator Obama
If you recall that no nation has given so much of its wealth and blood to help others, within and without its borders, as has the USA AND love your country because of that and for other reasons, you are a patriot and should not vote for Mr. Obama as he was a 20-year disciple of Pastor Wright who dammed our land to hell.
If you are proud of most of what the USA has done over the many years, you should not vote for Sen. Obama as his disciple, his wife, was only proud of that nation after her husband's successes in primaries and undemocratic caucuses.
If you believe that the State of Israel is the strongest ally the USA has in the Middle East and is the only real democracy in that part of the world, do not vote for Mr. Barrak Husein Obama as his church of 20-years membership has honored Minister Farrakhan of the Black Muslims who has so poisonously expressed his hatred of Israel and all Jews.(Senator Obama has also said, in effect, that if the "winds blow badly", he will side with Islam---And, at that time, said nothing about the USA.)
If you are a Jew, why (For the reasons above) would you vote for Senator Obama or, for that matter, for any member of the Democrat Party which nominated him?
If you believe that military service for our nation is honorable, do not vote for Sen. Obama as his invitation to youth to public service most pointedly ignored service in the Armed Forces. (My active duty was with the US Navy, 1956-1959, and I was issued an Honorable Discharge.)
If you, as I do, admit that not all heroes are in the military AND that there are cowards in all places. If you believe that Sen. Obama's refusal to debate Sen. McCain, in an unscripted and open way, not more than once and only on July 4th, is an act of cowardice, then do NOT vote for him as we certainly do not need a coward as President.
If you believe that Sen. Obama went back on his word to accept ONLY the funds allowed candidates under the applicable law and is a LIAR, do not vote for him as we have no need for such a person in our highest public office.
If you believe that a child born live after an attempted abortion deserves medical attention and care, do not vote for Senator Obama as he has a record of opposing a law which would require such care.
If you are among the millions who oppose any abortions, other than to save the live of a mother, you should not vote for Sen. Obama who supports abortion-upon-demand OR, for that matter, you should not vote for most members of his Party for the same reason.
If you are Black, you might wish to consider his lack of experience with real "Black life" in the USA and his support by a Party who has used, assumed and abused its Black voter support for many years. If you are Black and have ever lived in a "ghetto" or some "projects", you will understand how little that form of existence means to Sen. Obama in his Hyde Park residence with the double protection of the Chicago PD and the local university police department (The second largest in Illinois), and then wonder if he understands anything about "Black life" in the USA.
If you are White or Asian, do NOT vote against him because he is Black! Vote against him because he is the perfect example of a well spoken, slick, smooth and convincing---Used car salesman.
If you have done productive physical or mental labor, you might be doubtful about such as Senator Obama who appears to have only been a politician-in-training or politician or attorney. (My first job was at Age 13 in my school cafeteria, being hot and sweaty work; I earned my way through college as a Hospital Attendant.) I doubt me much if that Senator has ever done such labor or was ever a member of a labor union AND real workers should vote against him for his lack of productive labor.
If you are among those who believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the USA gives each sane, adult and law-abiding citizen the right to keep and bear arms (Including all handguns and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns), you will not wish to vote for this candidate as his track record is very much opposed to that right.
If you are among those who have concluded that the First Amendment ONLY forbids an establishment of a (Federal) official and state Church and that all are eligible for the "free exercise" of their religion (Except as it directly would physically harm minors or violate the criminal law) in all places (Including court houses, public schools, etc.) and under the free speech guarantees of the same amendment, do not vote for any Democrat as they generally oppose such a view and rule.
If you are proud of most of what the USA has done over the many years, you should not vote for Sen. Obama as his disciple, his wife, was only proud of that nation after her husband's successes in primaries and undemocratic caucuses.
If you believe that the State of Israel is the strongest ally the USA has in the Middle East and is the only real democracy in that part of the world, do not vote for Mr. Barrak Husein Obama as his church of 20-years membership has honored Minister Farrakhan of the Black Muslims who has so poisonously expressed his hatred of Israel and all Jews.(Senator Obama has also said, in effect, that if the "winds blow badly", he will side with Islam---And, at that time, said nothing about the USA.)
If you are a Jew, why (For the reasons above) would you vote for Senator Obama or, for that matter, for any member of the Democrat Party which nominated him?
If you believe that military service for our nation is honorable, do not vote for Sen. Obama as his invitation to youth to public service most pointedly ignored service in the Armed Forces. (My active duty was with the US Navy, 1956-1959, and I was issued an Honorable Discharge.)
If you, as I do, admit that not all heroes are in the military AND that there are cowards in all places. If you believe that Sen. Obama's refusal to debate Sen. McCain, in an unscripted and open way, not more than once and only on July 4th, is an act of cowardice, then do NOT vote for him as we certainly do not need a coward as President.
If you believe that Sen. Obama went back on his word to accept ONLY the funds allowed candidates under the applicable law and is a LIAR, do not vote for him as we have no need for such a person in our highest public office.
If you believe that a child born live after an attempted abortion deserves medical attention and care, do not vote for Senator Obama as he has a record of opposing a law which would require such care.
If you are among the millions who oppose any abortions, other than to save the live of a mother, you should not vote for Sen. Obama who supports abortion-upon-demand OR, for that matter, you should not vote for most members of his Party for the same reason.
If you are Black, you might wish to consider his lack of experience with real "Black life" in the USA and his support by a Party who has used, assumed and abused its Black voter support for many years. If you are Black and have ever lived in a "ghetto" or some "projects", you will understand how little that form of existence means to Sen. Obama in his Hyde Park residence with the double protection of the Chicago PD and the local university police department (The second largest in Illinois), and then wonder if he understands anything about "Black life" in the USA.
If you are White or Asian, do NOT vote against him because he is Black! Vote against him because he is the perfect example of a well spoken, slick, smooth and convincing---Used car salesman.
If you have done productive physical or mental labor, you might be doubtful about such as Senator Obama who appears to have only been a politician-in-training or politician or attorney. (My first job was at Age 13 in my school cafeteria, being hot and sweaty work; I earned my way through college as a Hospital Attendant.) I doubt me much if that Senator has ever done such labor or was ever a member of a labor union AND real workers should vote against him for his lack of productive labor.
If you are among those who believe that the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the USA gives each sane, adult and law-abiding citizen the right to keep and bear arms (Including all handguns and semi-automatic rifles and shotguns), you will not wish to vote for this candidate as his track record is very much opposed to that right.
If you are among those who have concluded that the First Amendment ONLY forbids an establishment of a (Federal) official and state Church and that all are eligible for the "free exercise" of their religion (Except as it directly would physically harm minors or violate the criminal law) in all places (Including court houses, public schools, etc.) and under the free speech guarantees of the same amendment, do not vote for any Democrat as they generally oppose such a view and rule.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
