Proud Member Of The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy

Extreme

2010-08-19T08:40:00.000-07:00

If this is extreme, I don't want to be moderate.

Too Good to Be True

2010-06-16T09:07:00.000-07:00

Just this week, the Obama administration released bureaucratic new health care regulations that could change or eliminate more than half of all employer-provided health care plans, affecting tens of millions of Americans. Apparently, “If you like it, you can keep it” was an Obama promise too good to be true – one of many, as it is turning out. -

Promises Made, Promises Broken: The Consequences of ObamaCare

Told ya so.

The Story of Your Stuff

2010-04-22T00:01:00.000-07:00

If you aren't the parent of an elementary school child or an elementary school teacher, then you probably haven't heard of Annie Leonard's video, "The Story of Stuff."

The Story of Stuff is a teaching tool - distributed throughout public grade schools - designed to bring environmental and Marxist ideas into children's classrooms disguised as a discussion on economics and ethics. No, that's not hyperbole.

Today being Earth Day, many schools will be airing this video to their students, and many of the concepts Leonard preaches will be blasted throughout all forms of media today to their parents (and the rest of us, as well).

The problem with Leonard's video isn't ~~only~~ that it attacks Americanism, innovation and industry. The problem is that it does so through lies and misinformation. Again, that's not hyperbole. Many of Leonard's claims regarding the environment, the government, capitalism and consumerism are easily disproven, and yet are still presented to students as truth.

Below I have embedded the first part of a critique of her video and these falsehoods, such as:

Over 50% of US tax dollars go towards the military (which is why we're all rich, right?)
Only 4% of American forests still exist
99% of products are trashed within 6 months
Indigenous peoples in third world countries are better off in native poverty than they are in having foreign investors come and provide job opportunities
The government, corporations and media have all been working together for the last 50 years in a conspiracy to train us to hate ourselves and find comfort in materialism.

Yes, all those topics and more are explicitly stated in the video.

And are being fed to our schoolchildren. It is absolutely unacceptable that provable falsehoods be taught in the classroom.

There are four parts in total. This is just the first.

I promise, you want to watch the following 3 parts as well. And after you've watched, be sure and share this video.

If you repeat a lie loud enough and often enough, the people will believe it" ~ Joseph Goebbels

Sometimes the truth hurts

2010-04-07T09:05:00.000-07:00

The Conservative talking heads are buzzing that apparently Tom Coburn is now bedfellows with Nancy Pelosi. The headlines all say "Coburn defends Pelosi," obviously trying to imply that he is siding with Pelosi politically. And many have fallen for it.

This was the most complete article on the conversation in question that I found. You can read it for yourself, but in summary, what happened was this:

Some "questioner" (though we never really got what the question was) started ranting about "all the evil people in Washington" and Coburn said there are a lot of good people in Washington "whose biggest problem is that they don't know what they don't know." And went on to say that Nancy Pelosi is a "nice lady."

And that's it.

No defense of policy or politics. Just that she's a nice person. And people are lapping it up as though it's a proclamation of reregistration.

All he said was that Nancy Pelosi is nice, but wrong - and then went on to detail what she was wrong about. Okay, that may be uncomfortable for us to hear, we like to think of our enemies as soulless baby eaters. But he said what I could say about many liberal Democrats I know - they're nice people, just wrong. And this is supposed to mean he's crossed over to the dark side? Does your back hurt from jumping to those conclusions?

When you are right on the issues, you don't need to go off on personal attacks. That's why the left's biggest defensive position on Obamacare is that people who oppose it are rich, cold-hearted racists who don't "care about people." The left's primary strategy is to demonize their opponents personally, not politically. Hello, Sarah Palin? And that's what Coburn's larger point was.

As far as Coburn's remarks regarding Fox News, I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and saying that was made in the heat of the moment. Then again, when Fox News now employs Glenn Beck - who to this day has yet to take back his erroneous statements saying there is no difference between Republicans (who stood in solidarity against Obamacare and nearly every major policy Obama and Pelosi have proposed over the last year) and Democrats - can you really blame him?

Tricksy...

2010-03-26T21:53:00.000-07:00

Putin Speaks at World Economic Forum

In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.

Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.

And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing....My conviction is that reasonable restraint in military spending, especially coupled with efforts to enhance global stability and security, will certainly bring significant economic dividends.

I hope that this viewpoint will eventually dominate globally. On our part, we are geared to intensive work on discussing further disarmament.

Tricksy Russian. He pulls you in with all this talk about "free enterprise" and anti-statism...and then sneaks in disarmament. Darned if it didn't work.

OTC what?

2010-03-25T16:03:00.000-07:00

‘Seeing’ Red at Reconciliation over Medicine Cabinet Tax

But one of the first things millions of Americans will “see” is an effective 40 percent tax hike on the over-the-counter medicines – from an antihistamine such as Claritin for allergies, pain relief medicine such as Tylenol or Excedrin, Pedialyte to prevent their kids from becoming dehydrated when they are sick, and even prenatal vitamins if they are expecting another one.

I know you are, but what am I

2010-03-25T14:11:00.000-07:00

Americans don’t like ObamaCare because “…they’re confused, it’s complicated”

While being questioned by Fox’s Bill O’Reilly about why there is so much bitterness following the ObamaCare vote, Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell falls back on the tired old liberal argument that the average American just isn’t quite smart enough to understand the complicated health care bill.

Maybe so, Governor, but you’d be surprised how many of those stupid Americans are smart enough to spell ‘liberal elitist’.

You lie!

2010-03-25T14:05:00.000-07:00

The "threat" hoaxes:

2010: A Race Odyssey — Disproving a Negative for Cash Prizes or, How the Civil Rights Movement Jumped the Shark

Coward Russ Carnahan Pushes Bogus Tea Party Lie to Media– Claims Prayer Service With Coffin Was a Violent Threat

Marinus van der Lubbe, Call Your Agent; Saul Alinsky Would Like To Speak With You

Will continue to be updated as more reports come in.

Birds of a Feather

2010-03-25T11:51:00.000-07:00

Fidel Castro Applauds Passage of Obama's Health Care Overhaul

Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro on Thursday declared passage of American health care reform "a miracle" and a major victory for Obama's presidency, but couldn't help chide the United States for taking so long to enact what communist Cuba achieved decades ago.

I don't even need to comment on this one, do I?

He was talking in light-years, obviously

2010-03-24T13:22:00.001-07:00

For those of you who missed it or were unaware...

Obama breaks five-day pledge

But Obama’s 5 p.m. signing came barely three hours after the House approved the bill, breaching Obama’s promise to have a five-day period of “sunlight before signing,” as he detailed on the campaign trail and on his website.

In the words of a great man,

YOU LIE!

But it's for the kids....?

2010-03-24T13:03:00.000-07:00

Gap in health care law's protection for children

WASHINGTON — Hours after President Barack Obama signed historic health care legislation, a potential problem emerged. Administration officials are now scrambling to fix a gap in highly touted benefits for children.

Obama made better coverage for children a centerpiece of his health care remake, but it turns out the letter of the law provided a less-than-complete guarantee that kids with health problems would not be shut out of coverage.

Under the new law, insurance companies still would be able to refuse new coverage to children because of a pre-existing medical problem, said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the main congressional panels that wrote the bill Obama signed into law Tuesday.

Well, knock me over with a feather....you mean they lied again? I'm shocked, shocked!

At least the Sun is still free...

2010-03-23T16:10:00.000-07:00

Health-Care Overhaul Changes to Start Taking Effect This Year

March 23 (Bloomberg) -- Indoor tanning salons will charge customers a 10 percent tax beginning today in just one of the changes Americans will see as a result of the U.S. health-care overhaul signed into law by President Barack Obama.

And you thought this was about helping the poor, uninsured masses.

Silly you.

Debra Medina and the Truthers: Why It Matters

2010-02-18T18:31:00.000-08:00

Something has arisen which I feel needs to be addressed. I do not think I am the best person to do so, but I am the only person I can make do so.

Based on an interview he had with her, part of Glenn Beck's base has violently split from him, denouncing him as either unwilling or unable to 'handle the facts,' and making an issue out of a non-issue: that is, whether or not Texas Gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina is a 9/11 Truther, or pals around with Truthers.

They say that, since she is running for a state-level office and not a federal level office, this is a moot point and should be overlooked. Of course, the majority of those saying this are themselves Truthers. Do they have a point? Would it only matter if we were talking about a federal-level candidate or appointee?

Believing that the US government was directly responsible (as opposed to indirectly, through a series of intelligence breakdowns throughout the 1990s) for the attacks on 9/11 is not the same as believing we faked the moon landing or in Santa Claus.

When you choose to take the position that our government attacked and killed American civilians on American soil, you are making an accusation of mass murder. And not just against George Bush. There are millions of people on the left who hate George Bush who don't think he ordered the 9/11 attacks. It goes farther than that.

Because, you see, part of that theory includes not just those giving the orders, but those receiving them. The orders to fly planes full of civilians into buildings full of civilians were not made to civilian pilots, or even automated drones.

No, the crux of the plan would have relied on soldiers (or airmen, more likely) first slaughtering the passengers on all four flights to prevent them from calling for help (because, you see, the recordings we have of them calling 911 or saying goodbye to their families were fabricated, either through machine or voice actors) and then flying planes into buildings full of thousands of even more civilians. All because they "were just following orders."

This is why I have zero tolerance for any person, public or private, who not only believes but acknowledges such belief as valid. This is worse than spitting on returning Vietnam Vets. It's perpetuating the myth that soldiers are nothing more than mindless, soulless baby-killing machines not only willing but eager to shed blood, friend or foe, so long as they have the excuse of "orders."

It is also why Debra Medina's views on this subject are, in fact, germane to her run for governor.

Anyone with such a view of our armed forces should never be elected to a position of authority over those armed forces. The Governor of Texas is the Commander in Chief of the Texas National Guard, a deployable force made up of men and women who are dentists, students, mechanics and moms. They deserve better than to be led by anyone who thinks there is room for debate over whether or not they are a class of sadistic mass murderers waiting to be let loose on society.

RIP: Tim Pope

2010-02-17T19:03:00.000-08:00

Let’s be fair to Tim Pope. Tim was indicted by the Multicounty Grand Jury on 12 felonies, including perjury, conspiracy, etc., etc., etc. The case ultimately proved an embarrassment to Edmondson. One of his witnesses would not cooperate, the second recklessly killed a mother of four and was charged with negligent homicide, and the third’s lawyer had written a wholly exculpatory letter before the investigation even started.

Ultimately, as Tim’s lawyer, I negotiated a resolution that all of the felony cases would be dismissed with cost paid by the State. In return, the State would file a single misdemeanor count to which Tim would make an Alford plea of "guilty," but would be placed on probation without conditions or supervision and that, too, would be dismissed. Tim died unconvicted of any crime.

He was an articulate, hard working, thorn-in-the side of the Democrats. In a day of self-important political consultants who charge outrageous fees, Tim was a winner of races on a local, district or county level. He successfully led Brent Rinehart to victory which caused an earthquake downtown at the Oklahoma City Chamber of Commerce, and in the Sheriff’s office. Time has proven Rinehart was right on his complaints and criticism, even if his style was too populist for the "tall building" crowd.

Tim’s greatest achievement, possibly, came in 2006 when Republicans lost their shirt in the statewide races. Tim managed brillantly five campaigns and won all of them.

l. He was the campaign coordinator for Bill Graves who defeated incumbent District Judge Susan Caswell. What a breath of fresh air that was at the Oklahoma County Courthouse once Bill took the oath.

2. He successfully managed Randy Terrill’s reelection in Cleveland County.

3. He guided Anthony Sykes to a last-minute, sleeper, cliff-hanger victory and inched the Republicans forward to control of the State Senate. Tony was a public defender subject to a last-minute television smear by the Democrats because of his clients. All it took to turn that away was Anthony’s father, a victim of the Oklahoma City bombing, to appear on a television ad and tell voters he was proud of his son.

4. Tim led the campaign for Jason Murphrey of Guthrie on his second attempt for the legislature. He defeated an incumbent Republican whom many judged a RINO.

5. Finally, the greatest upset for all, Charles Key, after several unsuccessful efforts, managed to get back in the House of Representatives by defeating his well financed Republican primary opponent by 40 votes.

Tim hit five home runs.

For that, Edmondson filed a $10 million lawsuit against him alleging a new interpretation of "ROBO call" identification requirements heretofore unknown, later said he would take $100,000, then $10,000, and after Tim won an appeal on a technical basis and it was remanded, Tim settled for $4,500.

The Democrats tried every way they could to destroy Tim or silence him. Only God has silenced Tim Pope. He was a fearless champion who fought for what he believed in, and a devoted family man. He was a strong Republican. He did not trim his political views. He was my client for four years, and it was a joy to be around him. Tim could energize any room and come from behind in any political race.

One other note to remind Republicans. While Edmondson really prosecuted Tim, and all Republicans should remember that this year, he did it behind a fig leaf. He appointed Rob Hudson, the Republican, that’s right, Republican District Attorney of Logan County and Stillwater, to be the "special prosecutor." Hudson never showed up for any court appearances and never was involved in the case, but simply lent his name to the cruel and meritless effort. By selecting a Republican to lead the investigation, Edmondson could claim it was "bi-partisan."

In the final analysis, while Jim Roth probably had too much to carry to get elected to a full term on the Oklahoma Corporation Commission with President Obama at the top of the ticket, all you have to do is look at how Jim Roth ran in some rural precincts and counties along the Red River and the Arkansas border. Those Democrat county commissioners knew what Edmondson and Roth had done to Brent Rinehart, who may have been a pariah in Oklahoma County, but in the rural districts among the commissioners was viewed as a hero and a man who could not be broken. Brent may have been defeated, Tim may have stood in the shadow of the jail, but Jim Roth was defeated and the Republican control of the Corporation Commission continued.

Tim Pope was a political organization genius and a good man in every sense of the word. Not many people had the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the assault that he faced and ultimately prevailed. http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/

One Word

2010-02-11T16:00:00.000-08:00

"Corpse-man"

Re: The O'Keefe Scandal

2010-01-29T12:40:00.000-08:00

This may well be the biggest news story of the year, not because of the specific incident in question, but of the subsequent and surrounding acts. This could be the final spear in the soft underbelly of the blind, biased monster known as the Main Stream Media.

See more below.
------------------------------------------

Statement from James O’Keefe

by James O'Keefe

The government has now confirmed what has always been clear: no one tried to wiretap or bug Senator Landrieu’s office. Nor did we try to cut or shut down her phone lines. Reports to this effect over the past 48 hours are inaccurate and false.

As an investigative journalist, my goal is to expose corruption and lack of concern for citizens by government and other institutions, as I did last year when our investigations revealed the massive corruption and fraud perpetuated by ACORN. For decades, investigative journalists have used a variety of tactics to try to dig out and reveal the truth.

I learned from a number of sources that many of Senator Landrieu’s constituents were having trouble getting through to her office to tell her that they didn’t want her taking millions of federal dollars in exchange for her vote on the healthcare bill. When asked about this, Senator Landrieu’s explanation was that, “Our lines have been jammed for weeks.” I decided to investigate why a representative of the people would be out of touch with her constituents for “weeks” because her phones were broken. In investigating this matter, we decided to visit Senator Landrieu’s district office – the people’s office – to ask the staff if their phones were working.

On reflection, I could have used a different approach to this investigation, particularly given the sensitivities that people understandably have about security in a federal building. The sole intent of our investigation was to determine whether or not Senator Landrieu was purposely trying to avoid constituents who were calling to register their views to her as their Senator. We video taped the entire visit, the government has those tapes, and I’m eager for them to be released because they refute the false claims being repeated by much of the mainstream media.

It has been amazing to witness the journalistic malpractice committed by many of the organizations covering this story. MSNBC falsely claimed that I violated a non-existent “gag order.” The Associated Press incorrectly reported that I “broke in” to an office which is open to the public. The Washington Post has now had to print corrections in two stories on me. And these are just a few examples of inaccurate and false reporting. The public will judge whether reporters who can’t get their facts straight have the credibility to question my integrity as a journalist.

The government has now confirmed what has always been clear: No one tried to wiretap or bug Senator Landrieu’s office. Nor did we try to cut or shut down her phone lines. Reports to this effect over the past 48 hours are inaccurate and false.

As an investigative journalist, my goal is to expose corruption and lack of concern for citizens by government and other institutions, as I did last year when our investigations revealed the massive corruption and fraud perpetrated by ACORN. For decades, investigative journalists have used a variety of tactics to try to dig out and reveal the truth.

------------------------

Correction Request: Newsweek

Correction Request: New Orleans Times-Picayune

Correction Request: Los Angeles Times

Correction Request: The Atlantic

Correction Request: The Huffington Post

Top 10 Things I Learned Listening To SOTU Last Night

2010-01-28T12:05:00.000-08:00

From Big Journalism:

Top 10 Things I Learned Listening To SOTU Last Night

Posted by Rich Trzupek

10) It’s really, really hard to be President – people expect you to do things and stuff.

9) America needs to be more like China.

8) Five year plans: they’re not just for Stalin anymore.

7) It’s still Bush’s fault.

6) Equity demands that it should be ten times more expensive to go to college in order to do something productive than it should be to go to college in order to become a bureaucrat.

5) Spending more public money on health care will still reduce the deficit. Really. It will.

4) Ending the influence of lobbyists and operating transparent government remains as important a promise to make today as it was during the 2008 campaign.

3) Joe Biden is very, very bored.

2) The problem with Washington is that everyone is eternal campaign mode. Accordingly, everyone should follow the President’s example and limit themselves to no more than 158 interviews and 411 speeches per year.

1) Nancy Pelosi’s face really is frozen.

(Honorable Mention: McCain-Feingold was passed during Teddy Roosevelt’s administration, for in overturning it the Supreme Court “reversed 100 years” of law).

What REALLY Happened at the March for Life

2010-01-27T11:59:00.001-08:00

Great Scott!!

2010-01-19T18:58:00.000-08:00

Memo to Democrats: It's about the issues. Get it?

Good Heavens

2010-01-08T01:30:00.000-08:00

"Separation of Church and State." Those words are tossed around a lot nowadays, usually and most often by people who do not know the original (and only applicable) context of them.

Firstly, should the church and the state exist as two separate entities? Yes. Even the Bible teaches us this. In Exodus, when God established the nation of Israel, he appointed Moses to be the political/judicial leader and his brother Aaron to be religious leader. However, He never intended for the two to be antagonistic toward each other. Quite the opposite, the very first law He gave Moses was that we should "not have any other gods before [Him]." But by establishing two different, separate institutions - church and state - He allowed for them both to focus on their own responsibilities while complimenting but not competing with each other.

Flash forward a few millennia. The Danbury Baptist Association wrote to Thomas Jefferson, worried that this new government he and his peers were forming would become too much like the one they were leaving - that it would mandate religion and religious practices. He responded with a letter, the letter from which we get the infamous above phrase. Here is the text of the letter:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.

Read that carefully, for that is the original source, context and intent of the sentiment "Separation of (or between) church and state." The intent was not to keep religion out of the state or to keep religious beliefs from influencing the state (as are so often claimed in the current marriage and abortion debates), but to keep religion free from government interference, either by establishing a national religion (as England had done) or by prohibiting an individual's practice of their religion.

So, it is with that in mind we approach today's topic:

Apparently, last August, our President held a webcast with clergy across the country, asking them to sermonize in favor of his health care plan.

Yes, that's right. He asked them to give sermons that pushed his political agenda.

Now, in light of the true intention of Separation of Church and State, is this appropriate behavior for a sitting President?

Of course, the nameless White House officials quoted in the article say that wasn't really what the President asked, that he doesn't actually expect them to give political messages from the pulpit. Duh!

That doesn't jive at all with what the members of the webcast have reported. They felt the intent of his statements was just that, based on the conversation that went on.

I've already posted my opinion on Obama's faith. This seems to fall in line with the impression he gives that faith is a facade, a useful tool to pull out when he needs to influence voters, but not something essential in his own life.

George W. Bush was often criticized for being too openly evangelical, such as stating that his favorite philosopher was "Christ, because he changed my life." But you can't name one instance where Bush tried to influence what was being preached in the pulpits. This is, in American history, unprecedented.

First, Obama tried to interfere in local schools. Now, he's trying to interfere in our worship services.

Take heed, and keep an eye out. We've just started the second year.

Equality for Thee, But Not for Me

2010-01-06T15:11:00.000-08:00

Let's take a poll, shall we? The punishment for a 1st grader bringing a plastic fork/knife/spoon utensil to school: suspension The punishment for wearing an anti-Obama t-shirt to school: suspension The punishment for a group of Arab-American 11th graders to design and wear these shirts to class: Nothing. Read the full story. They were not identifying with the towers in that graphic.

A Terrorist By Any Other Name

2009-11-06T07:12:00.000-08:00

Ft. Hood was attacked yesterday. 10 people died and 31 were wounded at the hands of a terrorist.

No, he isn't a "suspect." We know he did it.

He wasn't an "alleged shooter." There were witnesses.

He's not just a "murderer," although that would be bad enough.

Malik Nadal Hasan was a terrorist. And not because of his name.

Let's examine what we know so far to be true.

Hasan was a psychiatrist at Walter Reed for six years before being transferred to Hood. After 9/11, his family tells us, he was openly against the war and refused to be deployed. His coworkers said he was anxious about being deployed in a few weeks - for the first time. This would be his first tour of duty. He is not a veteran suffering from battle fatigue or PTSD.

Throughout his time at Hood, he told his coworkers that Muslims - whom he viewed as our enemies - were right in fighting and killing our servicemen and women.

Even more shocking, when a Muslim shot and killed two recruiters in Little Rock, AK back in the summer, that he was "happy" about it, that "this is what Muslims should do."

Other statements Hasan has made and/or written:

There was a grenade thrown amongs a group of American soldiers. One of the soldiers, feeling that it was to late for everyone to flee jumped on the grave with the intention of saving his comrades. Indeed he saved them. He inentionally took his life (suicide) for a noble cause i.e. saving the lives of his soldier. To say that this soldier committed suicide is inappropriate. Its more appropriate to say he is a brave hero that sacrificed his life for a more noble cause. Scholars have paralled this to suicide bombers whose intention, by sacrificing their lives, is to help save Muslims by killing enemy soldiers. If one suicide bomber can kill 100 enemy soldiers because they were caught off guard that would be considered a strategic victory. Their intention is not to die because of some despair. The same can be said for the Kamikazees in Japan. They died (via crashing their planes into ships) to kill the enemies for the homeland. You can call them crazy i you want but their act was not one of suicide that is despised by Islam. So the scholars main point is that “IT SEEMS AS THOUGH YOUR INTENTION IS THE MAIN ISSUE” and Allah (SWT) knows best.

He was also what the PC crowd would call an "extremist," even by their standards:

"A co-worker at Walter Reed said Hasan would not allow his photo to be taken with female co-workers, which became an issue during Christmas season when employees often took group photos. Co-workers would find a solo photo of Hasan and post it on the bulletin board without his permission."

Something else to consider:

This wasn't just some guy who "snapped." He had been so "extreme" for so long that even the military took notice and had him under investigation.

Thankfully, Hasan was not killed as originally reported. So more evidence should be coming out soon.

So what difference does it make whether this was a loony or a religious fanatic i.e. a terrorist?

Well, first of all, it's the difference between truth and lies. We have an obligation as a moral, civilized society to seek out and uphold the truth, regardless of who it may offend.

Secondly, we owe it to Hasan's victims to present the truth about their killer.

And third - if you are from NYC or from OKC, like I am, you know what it's like to experience a terrorist attack in your own backyard. And especially if you are from OKC, you know what it's like to feel like the investigation settled for an easy answer rather than the truth.

When we change our language and no longer call a thing by its proper name, the name loses its meaning.

Calling Hasan a "suspect," "shooter" or even "murderer" is far too respectful for an animal such as he, in the same way calling a rapist an "assailant" lessens the crime and disrespects the victim.

The man was a terrorist. A terrorist who chose to break his oath of allegiance to his country and his comrades for the sake of a twisted faith and ideology. To paint him as anything less is to become complicit in his crime by denying the truth.

In this war against terrorism - a terrorism based in ideology - the truth is our best weapon.

Use it.

The Politics of Politics

2009-10-13T12:25:00.001-07:00

One of the effects of the 2008 elections, the bailouts, the stimulus, Obamacare, etc., has been the rise of n00bs in political activism.

For the non-gamer crowd, “n00b” is originally the term for a person who is a novice in a particular video game. Actually, the word is “newb,” (i.e. “newbie” or new guy) when used to refer to a new person trying to learn the ropes. But if the newb becomes cocky, inhibits other gamer's playing or is generally annoying, the spelling changes and becomes “n00b.”

Recently, the Republican Party has been flooded with both newbs and n00bs. The newbs have donated to candidates, gone to TEA parties, shown up to hand out flyers, knock doors or run phone banks. The newbs show up and want to help and learn and work together to achieve our common Conservative goals. It is a beautiful thing and something specially American.

However, with newbs come n00bs. These are the ones who have never been to a precinct meeting, never volunteered on a campaign (maybe wore a t-shirt for their 2008 presidential candidate of choice), just started watching Glenn Beck, and have, until recently, been apathetic – or at least inactive – regarding the political workings of our country. And then suddenly, without any real experience in the mechanics of elections, have decided to run for office.

Fresh ideas and new blood are good. We need them, not just now, but all the time.

The problem is that with politics, as with anything, there is a learning curve. And when it comes to the politics of politics, there is a very steep learning curve.

Very few n00bs who run for office come away uncorrupted. Either they lose (or, more accurately, are crushed in) their race and become disillusioned, bitter and withdraw – or else they win, and once in office, are so inexperienced with the behind-the-doors dealings they wind up makings deals with devils they didn’t even know existed.

Campaign Managers

One example is the political consulting machine (or “racket,” as I prefer to call it). It’s common practice for a new political aspirer to either be found by or referred to a political consultant or campaign manager. And for n00bs, this is like manna from heaven. After all, the n00b has never run a campaign before, or really even worked in one. So why not rely on someone with years of experience of successful campaign organizing?

The problem is that campaign managers are rarely there out of principles’ sake. They don’t want to run your campaign because they believe in your cause (at least the seasoned ones). They want to run your campaign so they can take your money. They tend to prey on the inexperienced and suck campaign funds that could be better used elsewhere than paying somebody's consulting fees. Frankly, I have no respect for those of this profession on the local and state level.

Now, I’m all for capitalism. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that they should be making a living getting politicians elected. Here’s an example: right now in Oklahoma we are in primary campaign season. We have a couple of people running for governor on either side of the ticket. I know of a campaign manager/consultant who is managing the campaigns of both a Republican gubernatorial candidate and a Democrat gubernatorial candidate. This, to me, is not ethical. But it sure is profitable.

Of course, it goes without saying that you can win an election without a paid campaign manager, at least on the local and state levels. Do you need organization, advisors, all that jazz? Sure, but instead of going to former elected officials or grassroots activists and asking for help, n00bs set the dangerous precedent of hiring these scam artists – and once you hire them, you can never get rid of them, or guess what? They will run the campaign of your next opponent.

Candidate Recruiting

Another common local practice is the recruiting of n00bs to be candidates in local races. Consider this situation (played out often in reality but this is a composite of several I know of): a team of corporate welfare recipients and disgraced former elected officials (outed for illegal activity) launch an effort to recruit a n00b to run against the elected official who most openly opposed them, and more often than not, defeated their corporate welfare schemes or else gathered the information exposing their illegal activities. After asking almost 30 people, they finally find a n00b ambitious enough to run without asking many questions – you know, like “was I your first choice, what makes you think I want to run, and who all is involved here?”

Before being contacted, the idea of running for that particular office had never entered his mind. But suddenly he is being told he is perfect for this job and needs to run – and guess what, we’ll run your campaign and finance it and everything! If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Thankfully, this plan doesn't always work. But the n00b is a sad tool in their political vendetta, and now has alliances he may never be able (or see the need) to rid himself of.

Procedural Ignorance

The last issue with n00b candidates is the high level of naïveté among elected n00bs. There’s a difference, obviously, between a n00b on the school board and a n00b on Capital Hill. You can get a n00b on a school board or city council, and it can be a good proving ground. But n00bs never go for school board. Why would they? That’s small potatoes.

Within local Republican infrastructure there are all sorts of people who have gotten elected and stay elected, particularly to state legislative office, by forming evil alliances with those across the aisle that they rail against during the campaign.

A n00b goes in with his two or three goals for that legislative session and the wolves descend. Suddenly the n00b finds that people he never thought agreed with his goals do, and want to help him succeed in those goals, all he has to do is vote ‘Y’ on a couple of bills they are co-authoring – or else he finds himself inundated with crying mothers wanting him to “protect” their families by increasing government intrusion in their lives (i.e. pet breed legislation), and after all, he’s there to serve his constituents, and he begins the slippery slope of appeasement and backdoor dealings that are the demise, if not of political careers, of Conservative values.

Now, these are all addressed on the microcosmic level of state and local elections. However, this is creeping into the federal level, too, which to me seems even more dangerous. In Oklahoma, we have an unprecedented number of both newbs and n00bs running for federal office (I’ll leave it to you to form your opinion of which is which) and while I appreciate the enthusiasm, I am deeply concerned with the preparedness of a number of said candidates.

I am in no way postulating that only “certain” people should be “allowed” to run for office. But the level of inexperience and ignorance of the politics of politics among today’s n00bs can be destructive, not just to our larger conservative principles, but to that individual n00b himself

. So what’s the answer?

The solution is this: Channel your newfound political conscience into learning the process. Know who the players are - on both sides of the aisle. Learn that not everyone who wants to help you really wants to help you. And the only way this happens is by being involved BEFORE running for office yourself. Get over that initial learning curve of process, procedure and personalities. And dive in head-first, because we need all the newbs we can get.

**the identities of all candidates in the above examples have been deliberately withheld. I have no documentation of the situations described, only my personal eyewitness account.

What's Wrong With a President Addressing Schoolchildren?

2009-09-08T17:04:00.000-07:00

Go Steve.

2009-09-04T10:26:00.000-07:00

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/posters.htm

Sally Kern Challenger Announced

2009-08-27T14:02:00.000-07:00

The latest candidate to throw her hat in the ring against Rep. Sally Kern is local OKC lawyer Brittany Novotny.

Novotny is a native of South Oklahoma City, graduated from Westmoore High school and went to law school in California. She is now OKC lawyer (who briefly also served in a San Francisco law firm) who specializes in trail law dealing with civil rights violations, wrongful termination and personal injury.

On her Facebook campaign page, she is listed as a registered Democrat and the National Committeewoman for the Oklahoma Young Democrats (assumed current, since there was no date specifying otherwise), as well as LGBT Caucus National Committewoman for the Young Dems.

However, it is interesting to note that Oklahoma Data has her as having registered in Oklahoma in 2007, and only voting once – Super Tuesday of last year. Now, OK Data’s records only go through March 2008, so I’ll assume she also voted in the general in November. But still, that’s only 2 votes. Ever. (At least under the name "Brittany." Not knowing her birth name, I couldn't search for that.)

Novotny is a transgendered individual, who was born a man but now lives as a woman. The local LGBT mag Gossip Boy – which has a section called Sally Fighters (worth checking into, btw), as well as such charming ~~factually accurate~~ anecdotes like Sally Kern (whom they call Frau Butchy, in the typical tolerant liberal fashion) running around restaurants shouting “The homosexuals are coming” and poorly attempt to link Kern to the KKK - reported Monday their enthusiastic support for Novotny.

Novotny represented Keith Kimmel, who was suing because the Oklahoma Tax Commission refused to issue a car tag with the words “I’m Gay” as the plate. Novotny is, also, working on behalf of fired gay school teacher and “LGBT Community icon” Joe Quigley, according to Gossip Boy.

So it’s no surprise that Novotny has been the cover story of Advocate.com (above) and Queerly.com, with Gossip Boy hailing her as a “full-fledged LGBT hero.”

It’s common knowledge the national LGBT movement has put thousands of dollars in Oklahoma elections, such as Jim Roth’s recent run for Corporation Commissioner, and of course for previous (albeit heterosexual) Kern challengers. Again, their track record here hasn’t been very good. Pretty sure they’re somewhere around 0-4 at last count. But you’re welcome to keep pouring money into our economy.

This will surely develop into an interesting race. And keep your eye on that Jim Roth. Rumor is he has his eye on another less prominent seat this season.

Optimism vs. Pessimism: A Case Study

2009-08-27T09:09:00.000-07:00

Shocked, I tell you!

2009-08-18T10:20:00.000-07:00

Obama Joker Artist Unmasked: A Kucinich Supporter

by Big Hollywood

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, let me get this striaght. The Obama Joker poster artist:

20-year-old college student
Democrat
Palestinian-immigrant parents
Was just goofing around in Photoshop

I'm shocked - shocked - that the media isn't all over this! Only marginal mentions on any of the major news sites.

Okay, sure, I know there are bigger news stories. After all, who could miss Favre's 37th pseudo-retirement?

Flag Yourself!!

2009-08-13T16:12:00.001-07:00

For my historic 100th post, I am officially flagging myself.

Julie vs. Us

2009-08-11T09:15:00.000-07:00

So I'm reading one of Big Hollywood's reviews about Julie & Julia, and they link to the real Julie's blog. I decide to check it out, and this is today's entry:

"Also, yeah, I bash on Republicans a lot. It's nothing personal - some of my dearest friends... well, no, but dearest relatives - are Republican. I just am terrified of everything you stand for, is all."

Well, good to know it's nothing personal.

I've heard this creeps into the movie, but only barely, and I guess it would have to to be produced at all. I'll still rent it when it comes out, most likely. I love Amy Adams.

Life Upon the “Wicked” Stage

2009-08-10T12:22:00.000-07:00

As a companion post commemorating this weekend. And yes, it is political.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Life Upon the “Wicked” Stage

by Stage Right

Wicked, the smash international stage hit, is a phenomenon and triumph of luck, pluck and virtue for it’s primary creator: composer/lyricist Stephen Schwartz. Schwartz made a revolutionary cultural impact on American Theatre with his 1971 Off-Broadway hit Godspell. He followed quickly with his Broadway debut Pippin which was known primarily for the over-powering staging and choreography of Bob Fosse, but over the years, his score has gained new-found respect. A revival of Pippin debuts this week at Los Angeles’ Mark Taper Forum. Then came his next musical The Magic Show with 70’s magician Doug Henning and with those three hits running simultaneously it seemed Stephen Schwartz was on track to be the next great American Composer.

But, even though he continued to write quality work, including scores for animated features like Prince of Egypt and lyrics for Pocahontas and Hunchback of Notre Dame, his Broadway bona fides faded away in memory as a relic of the 70’s. Those inside the industry know that Schwartz continued to be active and involved in the industry and tirelessly encouraged the development of new writers and new musicals through his work with ASCAP. He traveled the country and selflessly helped young composers with their dreams. He is a true hero of the American Theatre and you have to really search far and wide to find anyone who would say anything bad about him. Stephen Schwartz is a “mensch” and he deserves the success he is now enjoying with the mega-hit that is Wicked.

As a piece of theatrical entertainment and as an introduction to the world of musical theatre for a pre-teen girl Wicked is fantastic. But, make no mistake, Wicked is a political story and carries strong political messages and it is frustrating for a lover of musical theatre to have to sit through morality tales that take me out of the fantasy world on stage and force me to reflexively defend my own beliefs in my head while watching the play. But, that’s what I found myself doing.

My previous posts on Rent and Andrew Lloyd Webber have elicited debates about the artistic worth of the plays in question and although I never intended “Stage Right” to be any kind of critical or artistic analyst, I now feel compelled to give my professional opinions on pieces that I’m discussing as well as their political and cultural ramifications.

I think it’s instructive to look at some of the reasons why Wicked is so successful musically. In any musical, the music is what drives the success of a piece and this is certainly true in the case of Wicked. Ironically, this show is probably the most derivative of an Andrew Lloyd Webber or “London Spectacle Musical” like Les Mis or Miss Saigon, than anything Schwartz had written to date. Do you ever wonder why, when you see a show like Evita, all of the songs seem so “hummable” and melodic… like you’ve already heard them? Well, you have! You hear “Don’t Cry For Me Argentina” about five times during the 1st act before you hear the actual song at the top of the second act. Wicked is Schwartz’ first show to use motifs in such a broad way, and it seems to have worked out well! For further explanation of Stephen Schwartz’ use of motifs, read this.

I don’t think it’s a spoiler to loosely describe the plot in this way: Wicked takes a different look at the inhabitants of Oz directly before and during Dorothy’s famous arrival and exodus journey. The plot focuses on the relationship between Galinda (later called Glinda, the Good) and Elphaba, the green skinned girl with amazing sorcery powers. Although the two girls loathe each other in the beginning of the play, they eventually become best friends despite their differences. Throw in a love triangle and a struggle for power in the Emerald City and you’ve got a nice short outline of the show. But, make no mistake, the audience must root for the “Wicked Witch of the West” or the show will not work on any emotional level.

Because of the heavy-handed political message, Wicked tends to fall apart in the second act. The first act is primarily about the development of the two characters, Glinda and Elphaba and how they develop and grow as individuals and how their friendship grows despite the peer-pressure and stereotypes people are trying to hold them to. But, the second act is all about Elphaba’s political fight against the establishment and Glinda’s conformity with the status quo. They go to great pains to twist the “Wicked Witch’s” actions into justifiable reactions to her being grossly mis-understood. Because it’s not a very easy feat, it’s no surprise that the second act comes across as contrived and emotionally lacking.

One other major criticism: This show has no strong, likable or believable male characters. All of the men are rather despicable or shallow, and the one man who actually grows as a human being only does so as a result of siding with Elphaba. Apparently in the world of Wicked, you’re either with Elphaba or against her.

To take L. Frank Baum’s classic tale of good and evil and turn it sideways and beg the audience to take a different perspective on the characters and see that the green chick was only acting out as a result of those who had wronged her is one thing. But the additional levels of political commentary on the Wizard’s regime and his totalitarian tendencies is something else. The Gregory Maguire novel which the musical is based on is actually much more strident and political and, frankly, disturbing, and the creators of the show have done a great job in hacking a lot of the ugliness of the novel out. But, in Schwartz’ own words:

I would argue that the show is still basically political in its content.

Among the specifics that changed: Oz in the book is essentially a totalitarian state, and the Wizard rules by fear, aided by his secret police force. In the show, the Wizard is more manipulative, pretending to be doing things for the good of Oz and to be subjugating the Animals for the greater good, but it becomes clear through the course of the evening that he is doing these things only to remain in power, and that his scapegoating of the Animals (pun intended) is because “one sure way to bring people together is to give them a really good enemy”. In fact, it may be argued that the Wizard in Gregory’s book is somewhat like Hitler, whereas the Wizard in the show has resemblances to George W. Bush and other American politicians. This doesn’t make the show less political; it merely makes it different in its political targets.

Oh, well that makes me feel better… instead of going after a Hitler character like they do in the novel, we’ve made the villain look more like George W. Bush and other American politicians. Enjoy the show, America, that’ll be $100 please!!!!

An element of the show is the oppression of Animals as second class citizens in Oz. Animals spelled with a capital “A” can speak and dress like humans distinguishing them from animals with a lower case “a”. The Wizard has set up various laws restricting the rights of the Animals so as to better consolidate his power because, (from the show): “one sure way to bring people together is to give them a really good enemy”. And, as Schwartz says:

Oz in the show is still a place where one “race”, the Animals, is being systematically deprived of its rights; the Animal story in the show still has strong elements of Jews in Nazi Germany or minority races in the United States.

Yeah, same difference.

In reading about the adaptation of the book to the musical you will find that one very challenging aspect was how to incorporate the sub-plot of the Animal opression which is very strong in the novel. It seems that they couldn’t escape this aspect of the story because it acts as the main motivation for Elphaba to do the things she does which then get characterized as “Wicked”. And, there-in lies the trouble with today’s musical theatre story-telling. A witch can’t just be a witch. Bad can’t just be bad. The enemy can’t just be the enemy. We MUST take a walk a mile in their shoes to understand their feelings… we have to understand the rage of the rioters in Los Angeles, we have to realize that Osama Bin Laden built daycare facilities and hospitals in Afghanistan. In other words, we have to be a leftist!

Unlike Les Miserables, where authority is questioned but true justice and compassion is measured by actions and loyalty and adherence to a universal code of ethics, Wicked is drawn in the gray shades of moral ambiguity and relativism. I long for the shows where good guys are good guys and bad guys are bad guys and we get to root for the right side. And, the biggest problem with Wicked is that the forced political references to George W. Bush’s America are so clumsy and jarring that they completely undo the fantasy world that the actors and designers have worked so hard to create. Any subtle allegory that was intended by the writers is completely undermined when they throw around terms like “regime change” in a show so rooted in fantasy and imagination. It is jarring to the audience, a majority of whom will reflexively be annoyed and defensive upon hearing the show’s villains equated with a man they voted for.

I like Wicked. I enjoyed it. I took my girls to see it. I’d see it again, but only because I can check my politics at the door and just appreciate it on a very surface level. But please, oh please… What would Godspell have been like if we had to understand Judas’ point of view?

Stage Right is on Facebook.

Cash for Clunkers = EPIC FAIL

2009-08-03T07:21:00.001-07:00

So today the Legislature is going to approve even more money to be flushed down the toilet that is "Cash for Clunkers."

Harsh, you say? How could it be a Fail? Isn't the program so wildly successful that the government has run out of designated funds for the program?

If your measure of success when it comes to government programs is the amount of expenditure of tax dollars, I suggest you try a similar practice with your own bank account. Spend a month's worth of grocery budget on one week's worth of food, and let me know how that works out for you.

The problem with Cash for Clunkers isn't that people are taking advantage of it. The problem is that the government is taking advantage of it.

If your measure of the success of a government program is how many people use it, then I'd advise you to revisit the recent CRA debacle, which - in a curious similarity to Cash for Clunkers - required (housing) lenders to issue more financing to loan applicants than they could afford - all for the Greater Good, you understand.

Skip the first 30 seconds to get to the actual meat of the video.

First, it's obvious this has nothing to do with stimulating the economy. Aside from the fact that government subsidies only create economic bubbles that eventually burst (see above) - they are instead requiring that the trade-in cars be destroyed.

This doesn't make any sense from an economic standpoint. After all, what traditionally happens with trade-in vehicles? The dealer either flips them itself or sells it to a smaller, independent dealer who in turn is able to sell it to someone who couldn't afford a newer car on their own. However, by destroying the trade-in cars, the government is undercutting an entire segment of the industry. And to reiterate, it's not a proof of GOOD planning that you run out of money 1/10th of the way into the plan.

Second, Cash for Clunkers only does marginal good to the environmental cause, and that's even allowing for the fallacious position that the government exists to enforce environmental ideologies. Must have missed that part in the Constitution.

To believe Cash for Clunkers will make a significant impact on the environment, one must assume one of two things: either A) all Americans drive equal miles, therefore by trading in cars getting 21mpg for cars getting 22mpg, it'll significantly reduce fuel usage, or B) some Americans drive more than other Americans, and those are the ones that will trade in their cars for more fuel-efficient cars, not the segment of the population that drives less. The first assumption is obviously ludicrous, and the second is improbable and unprovable. But that's only the first chink in the "environmentally-friendly" facade.

Specifically exempted from the Cash for Clunkers program are motorcycles. This makes no sense if the point of Cash for Clunkers (as has been alleged) is the "Greater Good" goal of lesser fuel consumption, since motorcycles average 35-40 mpg, much higher than the required 22mpg for cars. And anyway, the list of qualifying cars has changed weekly since the bill was signed at the beginning of the month, because apparently the definition of "environmentally friendly" is as nebulous and non-specific as the "Greater Good."

So, if it can't be economically or environmentally justified, then what's the real motive behind Cash for Clunkers? As always, the goal is control.

Back when the auto bailouts were in process, there was much talk from Capitol Hill that this money didn't come without strings attached. Pelosi and crew told automakers that if they accepted bailout money, they would be subject to Congressional regulations when it comes to the types of cars they manufacture, specifically environmental regulations. This was, again, wildly unpopular with voters.

So, rather than push new environmental regs on automakers, they backed off and have been laying low for a while, instead focusing on tanking the rest of the economy and getting unemployment back into the double-digits.

But now they have found the magic bean to get their fantasy of total auto regulation into becoming reality - Cash for Clunkers.

By allowing only certain cars to be traded in (the evil pre-2007 21mpg cars) for approved cars (the sainted 22mpg cars), the idea is to saturate the market with approved cars. Then, once they have data showing "that's what people are buying" they can justify requiring automakers - pursuant to their acceptance of the bailout money - to make cars falling within their environmental regs, which if you recall they couldn't even keep standard for this Cash for Clunkers program.

This is an irresponsible program all the way around. Considering the government has designated a 5-year-old 21mpg car a "Clunker," how will they designate your 80-year-old grandmother applying for a pacemaker under Obamacare?

Exclusive: The True Story Of The Hunt For And Capture Of Saddam Hussein

2009-07-31T07:27:00.000-07:00

Obviously,this is not my exclusive, though it could be. I have known Lt. Col. Steve Russell (Ret.) for several years now, and can attest that his valor and integrity as presented in the article are true. Both I and my husband helped on his Senate campaign last summer, and are proud to have him as both our State Senator and our Sunday School teacher.

This is a repost from Parcbench. If you haven't visited over there yet, do so.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exclusive: The True Story Of The Hunt For And Capture Of Saddam Hussein

Written by Ralph Benko on July 31, 2009

Mohammed al-Muslit motioned with his leg towards a floor mat—a white cotton rug—on a patio area. Four or five Delta soldiers pulled back the mat and saw some ropes and handles surrounded by loose earth. They pulled the handles, found a big Styrofoam square in a brickwork area and pulled open the lid with a flashbang grenade (meant to stun, not kill) ready to go.

When they looked in they saw two hands at the bottom — the bottom was a small space — like a grave — and when they saw the hands they decided to reach down and grab whoever it was. Out he came, and began rambling, “I am Saddam Hussein, the duly elected president of Iraq, and I am willing to negotiate.”

But…we are getting ahead of ourselves.

The hunt for and capture of Saddam Hussein by the United States Army is a story with all the drama of a thriller. But it is real, and, for mystifying reasons, not well known. Parcbench was able to track down Oklahoma State Senator Steve Russell, a retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and holder of the Bronze Star for Valor, who is considered by many to be one of the key masterminds behind the capture of Saddam. Although Col. Russell gives great credit to others, especially his commanding officers and Delta Force soldiers, whose names remain classified to this day, based on contemporary press reports from magazines such as TIME and Newsweek, it is clear that Col. Russell was one of the crucial figures responsible for bringing the “Butcher of Baghdad” to justice.

Many Americans, whose only exposure to the war is from television news, or Hollywood dramatizations, think of Saddam’s capture as a kind of indiscriminate assault. Nothing could be further from the truth. The meticulousness and discipline with which our military, especially our field commanders, devised and executed the strategy is, perhaps, one of the great untold stories of modern warfare.

In ancient times the compelling narrative of the capture would have been immortalized in a work such as Gilgamesh, The Book of Exodus, The Iliad or The Aeneid. It has that kind of epic quality. During World War I or II, Col. Russell very likely would have come home to a tickertape parade and a hero’s welcome.

But we live in an era in which heroic initiative has been devalued. Col. Russell is a modest, salt-of-the-earth family man with a lifelong commitment to American service and without a touch of vainglory. He retired from 21 years of active service in 2006 so that his five children would not grow up with their father fighting on foreign soil. Yet, he did not take a cushy job with a defense contractor. He went on to help America win the war in Iraq by pushing the then-ridiculed counterinsurgency strategy here on the home front.

Lt. Col. Steve Russell saw combat in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq, where from 2003 to 2004, he commanded a task force of around 1000 troops: the 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry. This task force was charged with the occupation of Tikrit in the first year of the war. Tikrit, of course, was Saddam’s home turf, and the 22nd became very engaged in the hunt and capture of Saddam.

Losing the opportunity to celebrate Lt. Col. Russell’s role in this American triumph would be our loss, not his. But luckily, he sat down and shared his reflections from this gripping tale. It is a narrative that is inspiring to those who are proud to be Americans, and it is as important to hear it today as it was a few years ago.

This is the history that Col. Steve Russell presents:

When I first took charge of the task force in June 2003, on my second day in command, two brothers presented themselves to us at our base. They were businessmen, from Ouja, Saddam’s birth village, just to the south of Tikrit and in the greater Tikrit area.

The brothers came and said that they had to see me; they had some information. At the time I thought, “Okay, here we go again.” We would get claims of “important information” all the time. People would bring us little vials of red looking stuff saying it was nuclear material, or bring in mercury, saying that they knew where all the hidden weapons were…all of these grandiose schemes. But when the sergeant told me about these brothers, businessmen, I just had this gut hunch, and told him to show them in.

The brothers began setting forth a story about the apparatus and network of Saddam’s security services before he was overthrown from power. They described his network of 25 bodyguards and another group called, “The 40,” the members of which were very close to Saddam personally and many of whom were related by blood or very old family ties. The 40 also served as bodyguards and provided personal services — cook, driver, and so forth. Beyond these inner circles, the brothers described something called “route clearers.” These consisted of several groups with 800 people each. Saddam, when traveling, would go on any number of routes, choosing which one to travel on a whim. The “route clearers” would proceed ahead on all of the routes he might choose. They weren’t openly armed, but would cover all the chokepoints of all the roads he might choose to take.

The route clearers were not an overtly armed presence, but they and the body guard groups became the source of the incipient insurgency. A clandestine presence. I remember listening to the businessmen brothers’ story at the time and thinking this was either the most elaborate lie I had heard or there was something to it. We began to work with others on finding some of the family network, the bodyguards and “The 40.” According to what we were being told, there were 5 controlling families: the Majids, the Hassans, the Hereimoses, the Hadooshis, and, the family that we found was the most important, the Musslits. We didn’t know why the Musslits became the most important after Saddam’s fall, but they ascended. We were led to believe they were the most dangerous family of all with 10 brothers and dozens of cousins. We decided to trust our informants and to take our investigation down this direction.

By this time, the United States Army had already defeated the Iraqi Army, which had almost disintegrated. In April, the forces Col. Russell would command (he didn’t take command until June) were given orders to occupy Tikrit. By June, the beginnings of the insurgency had really begun to foment.

We — me and my soldiers and the others in the brigade —came up with the strategy to go after the Five Families with particular emphasis on the Muslits. We gave some analysis to my commanding officer Jim Hickey (commander of the first brigade of the 4th Infantry Division) and Maj. Gen Ray Odierno (4th Infantry Division). Our analysis led us to believe that there was an upper tier — the “Deck of Cards” guys — consisting of Saddam and his henchman, the ones who got all the publicity. Then there was the bottom tier, which I called “the trigger pullers,” who we fought in the bloody street battles.

So we asked ourselves, “Who’s in between?” As we looked at it and took the information from the brothers from Tikrit, we concluded that in between was the security apparatus. We called them “the Bodyguards.” We figured that they must be the ones acting as go-betweens between Saddam and his remainder network and the guys fighting on the streets. If we could find them, we could follow them back to find Saddam.

The Bodyguards typically were between 35- 55 years old, much older than the trigger pullers. They had extensive involvement in the Republican Guard and the Saddam Fedayeen (martyrs), the elite, fanatical, loyalist group led by Uday. These were field grade officers when Saddam was in power. Going after this middle group, decided Col. Russell, would disrupt the street fighters who would be cut off from the people who were giving the orders (as well as from their paychecks).

And the Bodyguards also might lead to the big guys they were protecting.

In early June, we began acting on some of these tips. We did not really know how it all fit together but knew the guys we were going after were bad. It was like picking up the edge of a carpet and rolling it up until you got to the end. During the same timeframe, a special operations Delta team known as Task Force 20 arrived. The things we were pursuing and their leads began to overlap. I had an excellent relationship working with their team leader (whose name remains classified), and working directly with his team (size classified).

They wondered where we were getting our information and what we were finding. We shared almost everything, including sources. We earned each other’s complete trust — not something routinely given in a highly sensitive operation like this one. They were working on a much broader geographical scale. We were working on Tikrit, Ouja: the home turf of Saddam and much of his cabinet.

Col. Russell and his colleagues quickly realized that an insurgency was taking place, something Washington took a long time to grasp, almost costing us the war.

As if right out of a great spy or police novel, Col. Russell and his colleagues would get some information and meticulously use it to pursue this line of Bodyguards. In every raid they would search for and find new clues, such as photograph albums. They would look at the pictures in the albums and ask who the person just captured was standing next to in the photo. Then they would raid the house of another former Iraqi Army officer, who looked as if he might be part of the Bodyguard network. The network on the Saddam side had existed before the war, but it had been shattered by America’s assault, and they were putting it back together as best they could. The 22nd Infantry and Delta were in relentless, methodical, pursuit.

The Delta team captured Abid Mahmoud, the “Ace of Diamonds,” in June. He was Saddam’s presidential secretary, and one of the “Four Aces” in the “deck of cards.” The other three Aces were Saddam and his two sons. Delta caught him in northern Tikrit, a raid in which Russell’s soldiers assisted. He was the biggest catch of the war up to that time.

As a result of that raid, we got some tips about a possible safe house for Saddam himself, We were tipped off that he might be in a spot below a bluff known as the Hadooshi Farm. It was a fish hatchery with an elaborate orchard. We decided to act very quickly in hopes we would just go out there and get him. We conducted the raid, which began in the evening and extended into morning, but we didn’t find Saddam. I often wonder if he had been there hiding.

Although we didn’t get him then, there was extensive evidence that he had been there. We found several large (maybe two foot by two foot) fireproof bank boxes. One had the Saddam family photo albums — birthday pictures, days at the beach — and Mrs. Hussein’s personal papers, including her ID card and passport. The other boxes? One was a gold colored rectangular box with over 500 pieces of jewelry, valued at more than $2 million. The jewels were astounding, elaborate gold and enormous gems.

The other boxes had $8,500,000 in crisp American currency — still wrapped in Chase Manhattan wrappers, plus another $750,000 in foreign currency. These discoveries brought a lot of attention, national and international, and soon the press descended. While the street fights intensified, each raid led to others in our pursuit. We worked even closer with the Delta Team from that point on in a symbiotic relationship. The Army focused primarily on the Musslit family. In July, Russell’s men caught Adnan Abdullah Abid al-Musslit, Saddam’s number one personal bodyguard that served him over 20 years. One by one, Russell’s men and the Delta team determinedly netted others, taking about 60 percent of the key family players into custody by December. Rudman, a Musslit brother thought to have replaced Abid Mahmood as Saddam’s daily chief, was himself caught in a raid but he died, apparently from coronary. This was incredibly frustrating to Col. Russell and the others, since Rudman likely knew Saddam’s location.

What we discovered as we learned more, however, was that Mohammed al-Musslit, Rudman’s brother, was probably the single most important figure in Saddam’s entourage. In Saddam’s last public appearance in 2003, in the big public square, if you examine the footage closely there is a guy who gets on the back of the car with a pistol in his hand, guarding Saddam. That’s Mohammed al-Musslit. If we ever caught him, we felt he would know Saddam’s location.

Well, Mohammed al-Musslit was caught in Baghdad in a raid directed at another individual. During the interrogations, someone identified al-Musslit. Within 24 hours he was sent to Tikrit. The Delta team asked him questions and he started talking about a location. His morale was low. We’d been pursuing him for months. He had seen his brothers and colleagues caught or killed. He had been on the run and was unkempt and exhausted.

A few days prior to the al-Musslit capture, a teenage boy walked up to a checkpoint and said he knew where some important people were hiding.

He said “are hiding” not “were hiding.”

Col. Hickey then ordered Russell’s men to raid a desert farm that was, as it turned out, the same farm where Saddam hid during his 1959 escape after leading a coup attempt. As Iraqi forces closed in on that farm, he swam the Tigris and escaped on a horse.

We learned sometime later that this very likely was the very same farm where Saddam was hidden in 1959. A couple of days later, Col. Hickey called us early in the morning of December13 and said: “They got the fat man last night.” This was the code name we used for Mohamed al-Musslit. I was stunned. The Colonel said, “I want you to have all your forces available.” This could be it, I thought.

Saddam, according to the information provided, was on a farm near the village of Adwar on the bank of the Tigris River. From the farm’s riverbank one could see the Hadooshi farm and Saddam’s mansion in Ouja. Colonel Hickey put up a giant cordon on both banks of the Tigris. The commanding officers decided to raid two farms with two small teams, even though the thinking was that the northern location was more likely. The southern farm was a few hundred yards of orchard to the south, both on the edge of some big wheat fields.

Col. Hickey would cordon off the entire area and the two farms would be hit by small detachments, simultaneously. The first would be taken by G Troop 10th Cavalry, Col. Hickey’s brigade recon troop, of which 30 to 40 of the 65 members would conduct the raid. Delta elements, recomposed and now called Task Force 121, would take the Southern farm. At about 8 PM, the cordon would form a big noose and the two teams would go in. My own troops were on the West Bank as part of the cordon with the 299th Engineers. At 8 PM, all forces were set, and the detachments seized both farms. Two men tried to run to the Northern farm, but were snagged by Capt. Des Bailey‘s G Troop. We didn’t realize it at the time, but it was Saddam’s cook and brother. Inner circle bodyguards. For the next half hour the search was on.

The two detachments met after 20 minutes, without having found Saddam. It looked to them like another dry hole. But Captain Bailey said to the Task Force 121 commander, “let’s check it one more time.” Al-Musslit had been brought along for the raid. The Delta soldiers took him to the southern farm where the two men tried to flee from and had been brought back. Al-Musslit did not want to be seen or heard and neither did the cook and driver as they gestured to one another.

When they looked in they saw two hands at the bottom — the bottom was a small space — like a grave — and when they saw the hands they decided to reach down and grab whoever it was. Out he came, and began rambling, “I am Saddam Hussein, the duly elected president of Iraq, and I am willing to negotiate.”

Samir, the translator (an American citizen) translated and one of the Delta guys said, “Well, President Bush sends his regards.”

They began to check him for physical marks. Saddam had a 3 dot tattoo at the crook between the left forefinger and thumb, and a sunburst tattoo on back of his right hand. Sure enough, it was him. He got arrogant and tried to shove the soldiers away as they checked him. They straightened him out — which is how he got the busted mouth and eyebrow. He became benign, they put a bag over his head and immediately got him out of there. The first indication that made Col. Russell believe that the operation had succeeded in capturing Saddam was when he heard the Delta team commander radio to Col. Hickey “we may have something.”

Col Hickey then called me on a digital commander’s satellite phone — point to point, no chance of being intercepted — and said “Cesar Romero,” a code name we used. Earlier in the summer, there were pictures of what Saddam might look like in disguise, and one of the get-ups looked amazingly like Cesar Romero. The name stuck. Before I could say anything, he said, “not a word.” Tell none of your soldiers what has just happened. The President has to be notified.” I said, “Roger sir. I understand.” Col. Russell, along with a handful of Col. Hickey’s other commanders and staff, were among maybe 50 people to know what actually happened that night. Everyone kept it quiet until the President was notified. The rest is history.

But history did not end with the capture of Saddam Hussein. The war effort itself — the victory for democracy and American security for which Col. Russell and his colleagues had risked their lives— was imperiled. He declined a promotion to full Colonel, turned down a Queen’s University fellowship in Kingston, Canada for the war college, and retired from his Army career—leaving the battlefields on which he had fought for 20 years to devote himself to winning the war in another capacity.

Understanding the insurgency first hand, and not content simply to write the memoirs and engage in public speaking, where he is much in demand, Steve Russell determined to help raise American awareness of how it was possible to win an honorable victory in Iraq at a time when the nation at large wanted to quit. He formed a group called Vets For Victory (www.Vets4Victory.com) and began to tour America actively to bring forward his own witness of the situation in Iraq and how the soldiers could turn around a badly deteriorating situation and restore the possibility of victory for American and coalition forces if the nation backed them up.

At the nadir of the war, very few stepped forward to push for the counterinsurgency strategy. Arguing for victory in Iraq was vastly unpopular, widely considered close to political suicide. It took discernment and courage to take that stand. John McCain, operating within the corridors of power, was one who did. Steve Russell, operating at the grass roots, was another. As combat veterans, both understood, in a way that ordinary elected officials and civilians who have never seen combat never could, how wars are won. President Bush adopted the counterinsurgency strategy implemented by Generals Petraeus and Odierno, while groups such as Russell’s strongly advocated support at home. The tide of battle turned in favor of victory and a free and democratic Iraq, which will someday allow America to withdraw with honor intact and victory abroad.

And yet, notwithstanding his distinguished career and outstanding achievements, this story, perhaps, is mere overture. Last year, Steve Russell conducted a dark-horse campaign for the Oklahoma Senate— and, beating out four politically experienced primary candidates—won and then proceeded to win the general election. Russell understands fighting—and winning—on the political battlefield, as well as on the streets of Tikrit.

He is a conservative, a devout Christian, a devoted husband and father, a true patriot, a champion of veterans and their families, and a true man of the people. He does not, like most Senators, come from the privileged class and affluent background. He is in solidarity with working people and is viewed warily by some of the Oklahoma political establishment as a maverick Republican who does not reflexively do the bidding of Big Business or feel the need to defer automatically to the political apparatus.

Whatever the Establishment thinks of him, many in Oklahoma, and across America, view Steve Russell as one of the brightest rising stars in the Republican Party. His service to our nation has been—and continues to be—a blessing.

——–

Ralph Benko is a Washington, DC public and government affairs consultant and principal of Capital City Partners, LLC. He is the author of The Websters’ Dictionary: How to Use the Web to Transform the World (The Websters’ Press, 2008), which shows how policy and advocacy groups can effectively utilize the Web. It is available as a free eBook from www.thewebstersdictionary.com and in book form from Amazon.com and finer bookstores everywhere.

All Things Considered

2009-07-10T11:43:00.000-07:00

Can you really blame the guy?

Happy 4th!!

2009-07-04T09:15:00.000-07:00

................

Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord:

He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath are stored;

He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword:

His truth is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

His truth is marching on.

I have seen Him in the watch-fires of a hundred circling camps,

They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;

I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps:

His day is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

His day is marching on.

I have read a fiery gospel writ in burnished rows of steel:

"As ye deal with my contemners, so with you my grace shall deal;

Let the Hero, born of woman, crush the serpent with his heel,

Since God is marching on."

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Since God is marching on.

He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;

He is sifting out the hearts of men before His judgment-seat:

Oh, be swift, my soul, to answer Him! be jubilant, my feet!

Our God is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

Our God is marching on.

In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,

With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me:

As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,

While God is marching on.

(Chorus)

Glory, glory, hallelujah!

While God is marching on.

The Untold Story About Sally Kern

2009-07-02T13:48:00.000-07:00

In light of today's events, I felt this was important to share. Link at the bottom. -----------------------------------------------------------------

by Stephen Black and Chris Morrison from First Stone Ministries

The Untold Story of Irony

Washington’s political gay elitists with the Victory Fund edited Oklahoma State Representative Sally Kern’s comments from a closed door meeting given in a January speech of this year. They edited down the comments to what they considered the most inflammatory sound bites. Their cunning plan was to upload the edited comments to YouTube in hopes of enraging gay people and their supporters. This plan, they thought, would further the “Victory Fund” gay political cause and bring in funds for their political machine. Over and over they emphasize that Rep. Kern’s speech demonstrated hatred towards gays. What they failed to mention – or include in the sound bites – is the truth, that Rep. Sally Kern said we must love the homosexual. Her message was not about bashing gays. The main stream liberal media outlets who seem to be unconcerned about what was been left out, and unmotivated to seek the whole story, responded predictably. They thrive on bad news and smear tactics of conservatives, so they picked up the story immediately and replayed the inflammatory comments. The story was worldwide overnight! Sally Kern was labeled hateful, bigoted, anti-gay, an evil homophobe and so many other names that are so vile, I cannot repeat.

In her remarks during the January speech, Rep. Kern mentioned the parallel of the gay political movement in the United States – not individual gays. She said the agenda of the gay political movement is, in her opinion, as dangerous as terrorism. While I personally would not have used this parallel, the irony of this story is impossible to ignore. That irony is demonstrated very visibly in the hate emails numbering over 26,000, death threats, and the mean-spirited and orchestrated campaign calling for her resignation. These very tactics are akin to terroristic tactics, therefore point directly back to Sally’s original parallel. Truly this is ironic! This political tactic, directed to silence Rep. Kern, bully her and other conservatives and manipulate the unsuspecting public almost worked. However, what they did not realize was Sally Kern’s courage and steadfastness.

The demographics suggests that the 26,000 emails are a very small representation of how the gay and sympathizing population feels about Rep. Kern. No doubt there are politicians afraid of this very loud well-funded fringe group. Death threats and demands for Sally Kern to resign from office were meant to be a warning to other politicians. “We are listening!” They threaten. Hundreds of YouTube videos were uploaded with incredibly hateful words from those who piously declare, “SAY NO TO HATE.” Their usual demand for everyone, everywhere to have “tolerance” was diluted by their very own actions, which are incredibly hateful and intolerant. Truly this is hypocritical, and very misleading.

The irony of this untold story is indeed very interesting. But is anyone in the media elite willing to talk about it? Perhaps they fear the wrath of the gay community. Late-night comedian Jay Leno suffered just last week when he poked fun at a soap-opera actor who played a gay character. The irony is almost laughable if it were not so alarming to those who love Judeo-Christian values and the traditional family.

Well over 1500 people rallied at the Oklahoma State Capitol to support Sally Kern. They realized that freedom of speech is under fire. Contrast this with the well-organized homosexual political activists who diligently push their manifesto. These activists want the USA to be like our Canadian neighbors. They desire control over free speech, using their banner of tolerance while at the same time labeling Judeo-Christian beliefs hate speech. They wish to silence Christian values by enacting hate speech laws that would make it a violation to state a belief that homosexuality is sin. There seems to be no end to their tactics to redefine American traditional values. Many, like Sally, are standing up now and saying, “enough is enough!” However, will we continue to stand up and lovingly sow truth?

The Untold Story of Ministry and Concern

Does it make sense to you to label someone who actually helps people who struggle with homosexuality as hateful, bigoted, anti-gay and an evil homophobe? The untold part of this story – which I delight to tell you now – is that behind the scenes, Rep. Sally Kern and her husband, Dr. Stephen Kern have supported First Stone Ministries for many years. Dr. Stephen Kern is the senior pastor at Olivet Baptist Church, which actually hosts some of First Stone Ministries’ support groups. The Kern’s have a special place in their hearts for our ministry to those who struggle with same-sex attractions and homosexuality. For several years before all this controversy erupted, they had put action to their love for those who are struggling and for their families. The next part of this untold story is from a current staff member with First Stone Ministries.

The Untold Story of Love and Devotion to Those Who Struggle

It has been an honor to be a friend of the Kern family for several years. I am Chris Morrison, development coordinator with First Stone Ministries. I want you to know that the Kern’s played a healing role in my life. Ten years ago I was battling with how I was to live my life. I would either continuing to seek the Lord in my weakness or just give up and live as a gay man. While in college in a neighboring city, I would drive to Oklahoma City and spend weekends in the Kern’s home; Sally Kern would also take me to the airport so I could fly home for holidays and leave my vehicle in their care.

Though I attended a Baptist university, I still carried my brokenness on my sleeve, as I struggled intensely with homosexual feelings. I will never forget the seed that was sown on Thanksgiving weekend in 1997. Sally Kern was taking me to the airport and she gently broached the subject of my homosexual struggle with me. I was surprised and scared of what she was going to say, because I hadn’t told many people about my struggle. It was rare for someone to bring up my struggle before I had ever disclosed it. Her tenderness was overwhelming; she lovingly ministered to me that day. She mercifully let me know that she and her family were praying for me, and that they loved me. That day is precious to me as I felt so loved and accepted. I am grateful to the Lord that Sally had enough courage to plant the seeds of God’s forgiveness, hope and healing.

In 2004 I had the privilege of supporting Sally Kern as she ran for State Representative. I attended her watch party on Election Day and remembered her saying she knew that God was calling her to run for State Representative, but didn’t know all the reasons. That statement resounded in my head as I stood and watch Sally Kern at the Freedom of Speech Rally – “Rally for Sally” on April 2, 2008. I remembered the words from the Bible, “For such a time as this.” Sally Kern, is a representative “for such a time as this.” I am grateful to Sally Kern for her humble stance, as well as her boldness to call the nation to repentance, and to call for Christians to stand for traditional values in our land. I am a man who was nearly enslaved by the lie of being born gay, yet Jesus saved me from that deceived existence. The Kern family played an integral role in my healing from homosexuality, for which I am eternally grateful.

This is the untold story behind the precious Kern family that you will most-likely never hear as a main story in the liberal media.

In Conclusion

We should not be so quick to judge everything we hear in the media as the truth. I was wisely taught by my Irish mother to consider your sources thoroughly, make sure you have both sides of the story, and get all the facts before coming to a conclusion. Unfortunately many people did not with Sally Kern’s story. The propaganda machine of gay elitists fed only a part of the story to the liberal media in a deliberate attempt to stir controversy.

I am grateful that we are having this national dialog. I hope, as a result, more people will really take a look at what is happening morally to this country. A well-funded political gay movement with its warped ideology could completely change our country in just a few short years. Christians need to be informed and active. We need to stop being so apathetic. We cannot be afraid of angry loud voices. If we, as Christians fail to be salt and light, then the darkness will overcome the USA. It could become very dark in just a few short years. We must lovingly and compassionately proclaim the Gospel truth of Jesus Christ and pray for a God-breathed revival in the United States of America.

source

This One Trumps Them All

2009-06-29T10:40:00.000-07:00

Most-decorated Marine Aviatior in history, Kenneth L. Reusser, dies at age 89

Retired Marine Corps Col. Kenneth L. Reusser, called the most decorated Marine aviator in history and was shot down in three wars, has died at age 89.

Reusser flew 253 combat missions in World War II, Korea and Vietnam and was shot down in all three, five times in all.

His 59 medals included two Navy Crosses, four Purple Hearts and two Legions of Merit.

In 1945, while based in Okinawa, he stripped down his F4U-4 Corsair fighter and intercepted a Japanese observation plane at a high altidude. When his guns froze, he flew his fighter into the observation plane, hacking off its tail with his propeller.

In 1950 in Korea led an attack on a North Korean tank-repair facility at Inchon, then destroyed an oil tanker almost blowing himself out of the sky.

In Vietnam he flew helicopters and was leading a rescue mission when his Huey was shot down. He needed skin grafts over 35 percent of his badly burned body.

Reusser, who lived in the Portland suburb of Milwaukie, was born Jan. 27, 1920, the son of a minister.

Reusser raced motorcycles to help pay for college and earning a pilots license before WWII.

After retiring from the Marine Corps he worked for Lockheed Aircraft and the Piasecki Helicopter Corp. He remained active in veterans groups.

Reusser died June 20 of natural causes. He is survived by his wife, Trudy; and sons, Richard C. and Kenneth L. Jr. Interment was Friday in Willamette National Cemetery.

After this week, the term "Unsung Hero" takes on a whole new meaning for me.

Hat Tip: The West Coast Outpost

Jacko Whacko

2009-06-26T12:04:00.000-07:00

Meanwhile, pro-democracy fighters are still dying in Iran. Just in case you forgot.

Pray for Nettie

2009-06-23T09:53:00.000-07:00

South Carolina Republicans have formed a website and are planning a benefit event on behalf of Nettie Britts, the 24-year-old Young Republican leader who was savagely attacked in her home late last week.

Britts remains hospitalized in serious condition and her intruder remains at large after the attack, which police believe took place late Wednesday night or early Thursday morning in North Columbia, S.C.

The Richland County Young Republicans chair suffered a fractured skull in the attack, which does not appear to have been politically motivated.

Britts’ colleagues described her as a “good kid” and a hard worker who earned their respect.

“Nettie has always been the first person to volunteer on almost any campaign I’ve worked for,” said GOP activist and fund-raiser Sunny Phillips. “I cannot fathom the violence that she has just encountered and I hope that they bring those responsible to justice.”

A website, HelpNettie.com, has been formed to accept donations on behalf of Britts, and popular GOP blogger Earl Capps is said to be organizing a benefit on Britts’ behalf.

Additionally, a Facebook group has formed to support Britts.

Obviously, we would encourage everyone to lend a hand, and to keep Britts in their thoughts and prayers as she continues to recover …

Hat tip: fitsnews

Mr. Gorbechev…Nice Tie Today….

2009-06-20T20:50:00.000-07:00

My blog is not green. That is not a statement.

As an American, it is my obligation to support free, open, honest elections and oppose any efforts to suppress that.

So, rather than turn my blog green (because it’s a hassle to go back and forth and it would totally mess with my OCD need for color coordination) I am taking this opportunity to say I support free, open, honest elections for peoples of all nations without fear of repression or reprisal.

And as such, I support the Iranian people in their desire for free, open, honest elections without fear of repression or reprisal.

Friday, the House voted nearly unanimously to pass a resolution to supports "all Iranians who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law."

Not to support a specific candidate in the election. Not to intervene either militarily or diplomatically.

Just a plain statement of support for the above qualities, all central American – Conservative – values.

Only one Representative took a stand against the Conservative principles of freedom, human rights, civil liberties and the rule of law.

Republican Ron Paul.

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I’m not.

If it wasn’t Ron Paul, I would think it was a joke. But this is also the man who, early in the primaries, said that America hadn’t been attacked by a foreign power in 250 years. Which is why there is no holiday on December 7.

So really, this is just par for the course.

We now have Paul on record opposing a resolution that says the following (language from the resolution):

• "(1) expresses its support for all Iranian citizens who embrace the values of freedom, human rights, civil liberties, and rule of law; • "(2) condemns the ongoing violence against demonstrators by the government of Iran and pro-government militias, as well as the ongoing government suppression of independent electronic communication through interference with the Internet and cell phones; and • "(3) affirms the universality of individual rights and the importance of democratic and fair elections."

His excuse? “We know very little beyond limited press reports about what is happening in Iran." (source)

In that ludicrous statement, Paul betrays his ignorance of the situation by blaming a lack of information on “limited press reports.”

Almost all of what we know of what is going on in Iran has come not from official press agencies, but rather from individual Iranian citizens using networking sites like facebook (until it was banned) and now Twitter.

In fact, Twitter was so essential to the communication between Iranian dissidents and the outside world that Twitter rescheduled maintenance so as to not interrupt their flow of communication. Go here for more info regarding the importance of Twitter in the Iranian Revolution.

The official statements from the Iranian government, however, say that Ahmadinejad won by a landslide in an legitimate election where it took 20 minutes to tabulate over 350,000 ballots.

To Paul, apparently, that’s enough to create reasonable doubt.

Here’s what the real issue is, though. What did this resolution actually do?

Did it order the military to go to Iran? No.

Did it claim one person did or should have won the election over another? No.

Did it threaten to intervene in the Iranian elections? No.

Did it do really anything in a practical sense? No.

So there was no imperialism (which totally screwed the Japanese, they’re nothing but American serfs nowadays, right?) or “policing the world” (like with those poor innocent Nazis, we had no business interfering in their peacekeeping enterprises) as some have alleged.

All the resolution did was officially state that we, as Americans, support free, open, honest elections and condemn violence against individuals, specifically as it regards the situation in Iran.

So then, what is the point in opposing it?

Reagan took a much more direct, oppositional, antagonistic stance when he went to Berlin and gave his famous imperative to the Soviet Union.

But you’re right, that was a huge imperialist, meddlesome screw-up. No reason to follow that fellow’s footsteps.

One wonders how Paul would have responded had he been in office at the time. Actually, no, we don’t have to wonder. This vote shows us exactly how he would respond.

Hold him accountable, ladies and gentlemen. You’ve called other good Conservatives RINOs for less.

Yes, It's Just Miracle Grow

2009-06-17T09:36:00.001-07:00

What, you mean that's NOT normal??

Ho. Ly. Crap.

2009-06-12T17:32:00.000-07:00

I never thought I would see the day when not only MSNBC, but Rachel Maddow of all people, criticizes Obama. And it's totally justified.

Preventative Detention.

You have to see this

2009-06-09T13:57:00.000-07:00

This is Jon Voight's speech last night at the 2009 Republican Senate-House Dinner. It's not very long, but it's so worth the watch. His delivery isn't dynamic; the words carry their own power with nearly no inflection, and yet they are dynamite.

Westboro ala Hajib

2009-06-06T07:24:00.000-07:00

Remember Westboro Baptist Church?

Westboro is a political activist group masquerading as a Baptist church that, a few years ago, terrorized military funerals in Oklahoma (as well as other states). As a result, State Rep. Paul Wesselhoft along with others passed a law protecting military funerals from being harassed.

I saw these people in action because right after the bill was passed, they came to Wesselhoft's church - my church - on a Sunday morning and protested, holding up their "God hates you" signs as families drove into the parking lot. The most bizarre thing about this was that several groups from my school, UCO, came to counter-protest Westboro. So, across the street, we had the crazy Kansans with their infamous God Hates Fags paraphernalia. On the church's property, there was a hodgepodge of counter-protesters from groups representing war veterans, Christians, feminists, marxists and atheists. I know this because I saw the flyers around campus for almost two weeks advertising the counter-protest and outlining which groups were "sponsoring" the counter-protest (pretty much all of them).

One wonders if they all would have turned out to counter-protest Code Pink or Cindy Sheehan, who has the exact same MO as Westboro "Baptist Church". Actually, no, one doesn't wonder. Obviously, the answer is "no."

Westboro does not "peacefully assemble" at funerals and protest, though that would be disgusting enough. They show up to try and provoke funeral-goers. That's how they make their bank. They get in the face of the father of some fallen soldier, provoke him to the point that he would hit one of the Westboro nuts, then they sue the pants off the soldier's family and get funding for their next "rally."

So this law by Wesselhoft did not infringe upon their right to speak and peacefully assemble in as much as their assembling was not peaceful in intent or nature. The same way that your right to keep and bear arms disappears when you abuse that right and murder someone in cold blood, like Private William Long.

As you know, Private William Long, an Army recruiter, was assassinated by an Islam convert. The killer, Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, was later found to have maps and information suggesting that he would attack further targets, including a Jewish center, a Baptist church, a day care center for children and a post office.

But, hey, this had nothing to do with his Muslim faith. Somehow it was OUR fault.

Or at least, that's what this person wants us to believe.

Shortly after the shootings, a memorial service was held for Private Long on a roadside. A woman didn't appreciate it, and pulled a Westboro.

While I hate to give this woman circulation and airtime, I think it's important we see the kind of people who, like Westboro, do not mourn the death of a soldier, and in fact revel in it. A soldier who took an oath to die in order to protect their ability to spit on his grave.

This was filmed by one of the guys at the memorial service. I wish he wouldn't have put commentary and graphics on it and just left the video clean, but whatever. It's the only copy I could find. And either way, it doesn't obscure what this woman was spewing. You can do what I did and play it in the background while looking around facebook.

Watch. Share. Never forget.

Hat Tip: The Lambeth Walk

Happy Memorial Day

2009-05-22T13:31:00.000-07:00

And thus be it ever
When free men shall stand
Between their loved homes
And the war's desolation

Blessed with victory and peace
May this heaven-rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made
And preserved us a nation

Then conquer we must
When our cause it is just
And this be our motto:
In God is our trust

And the Star Spangled Banner
In triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free
And the home of the brave

~Francis Scott Key

You Didn't See Anything

2009-05-11T13:27:00.001-07:00

If you're here and reading this you've heard about the embarrassment that was the Wanda Sykes speech at the WHCD. But, on the off-chance you haven't, here's the vid:

Did you notice anything? Like our illustrious President yukking it up when Sykes wished Rush dead and called him the 20th hijacker (who we have captured and successfully "tortured" [bathed] information out of to stop the Library Building attack)?

Over the weekend the blogosphere had a field day, not only with Sykes' remarks, but with Obama's reaction. But then, after hearing his speech, it appears his taste in humor is right on par with his taste in cabinet appointments.

But TODAY, today the Obama White House found nothing funny about Sykes' speech at all. The official press release states: White House not laughing about Sept. 11 joke. "The White House is keeping its distance from an entertainer's joke comparing commentator Rush Limbaugh to a terrorist." Yeah, a distance of about three feet.

This is standard MO for Obama. Deny, deny, deny, because the media will say whatever he wants them to say.

"I went to Rev. Wright's church for 20 years and never heard one of those sermons they play on TV."

"I barely knew Bill Ayers."

"I didn't bow, I was looking for my contact."

And now, "I laughed, but I didn't think it was funny."

Right up on par with "I smoked, but I didn't inhale," don't ya think?

Just smile and wave, boys. Smile and wave.

Follow-up

2009-04-24T08:36:00.000-07:00

WWYD?

2009-04-23T07:58:00.000-07:00

Here we have two examples of culture clashes in the last couple of weeks. You by now have seen one, and may have seen the other, but I would still like you to watch both before proceeding.

The Colbert Report

Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c

Bart Ehrman

colbertnation.com

Colbert Report Full Episodes

Political Humor

Gay Marriage Commercial

One is softball, the other hardball.

As Christians, we have been force-fed social pacifism for over 50 years. We've been trained to "nice" people into Christianity, because if we're not nice, they might not join our club.

Was Miss California "nice" in her answer? She was polite. She was professional. She answered the question within the framework and context of the setting in which it was asked - a beauty pageant. Even the questioner, Perez Hilton, notorious for angry screeds, asked the question in a polite, professional manner, albeit weighted. ("Do you think ALL other states SHOULD follow suit?" Subliminal language choices, much?) The Q&A sections have never been about a contestant's actual answer, but about the delivery of the answer. So what did she do? She answered the question honestly - stumbled a bit, true - but in a manner reflecting the situation she was in.

The Colbert situation was entirely different. In this situation, we weren't talking about a social issue, but the very nature of Christianity, and it brought out the bear in Colbert. It should bring out the bear in you, too. His guest, Ehrman, was snide, factually incorrect, and assaulting Christianity. Colbert didn't take it.

Both of these reflect Christ-like responses to similar situations. Miss California echoes Jesus with the Woman at the Well. He didn't attack her lifestyle, but lovingly brought her to face what she already knew in her heart - that it was wrong. Perez Hilton lashed out because he thought asking a Miss California this question was going to be a cakewalk. He was wrong, and it struck a deeper nerve within his heart, thus prompting the vicious personal attack.

Ehrhart was not only attacking the institute of Christianity, he took the same stance the Pharisees in Jesus' day took - that Jesus wasn't the divine Son of God, only a man. And how did Jesus respond? How about "den of vipers," "whitewashed tombs." Try that today and see if someone doesn't shoot you in the back for name-calling.

What's the point of all this? The point is that we as Christians always need to be ready to give a defense of our faith, both Scripturally and factually accurate as well as emotionally and situationally responsive. So often today a pastor can't even give an invitation without saying "I don't mean to hurt your feelings" 11 times.

It might hurt someone's feelings to point out that they connected the brakes on their car wrong, but it's better than the alternative, isn't it?

“If I profess with the loudest voice and the clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the solider is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.” ~ Martin Luther

The Sad State of Our County

2009-04-17T08:03:00.001-07:00

With the State Convention tomorrow, there are a lot of email and blogs buzzing around. While I could write plenty about the proposed caucus resolution, about which I have very passionate opinions, something else needs to be addressed.

Many of you reading this, I'll assume, were at the Cleveland County Convention. I base this assumption on the fact that if you are reading this you are an involved Republican, and if this was forwarded to you, it is from someone who knows you live in Cleveland County. Of course, even if you weren't there, you undoubtedly have heard of the controversy surrounding our County Chairman's race.

If you were there, then you saw that my entire precinct voted for Chad Williams. That, obviously, means that I did. I believed Chad was motivated to work hard for the county and invigorate the grassroots with Conservative leadership. You know the results. Due to County vote tallying rules, Bobby Cleveland was elected Chairman.

Initially, I was encouraged by those individuals who said, "We will respect the office and work together to help build up the party."

Unfortunately, to our shame, this is not what has happened.

Almost immediately, before the county party or chairman really did anything, I began receiving emails inviting me to join organizations apart from the Cleveland County Republican Party, not in addition to the County Party but instead of. Backbiting about Bobby and how he won "by a technicality" is rampant.

First, let me address this concept that he won "purely by a technicality." I was there, as I'm sure most of you were, and I saw how it happened. And the bizarre nature by which this particular race ended will be the stuff of County legend. A lot of people were upset that the race outcome was determined by delegate vote allotment and not a pure delegate vote. In fact, this situation is not unprecedented.

POTUS is not elected by a pure majority vote of the people, as you know. POTUS is elected by the Electoral College. There are instances in history where the outcome of the general election was not the same as the outcome of the Electoral College. Or, POTUSes have been elected with a majority of electoral votes but not a majority of general population votes. They were still legitimately-elected Presidents.

Our County, District and State Conventions operate by similar rules through delegate vote allotments. I think my vote was worth .8 of a vote in the final tally, but in other precincts a delegate may have gotten a full vote or even 1.2 votes. This is the way the rules are structured, not just for Cleveland County, but for every county and every level on up.

Therefore, if any individual wins due to vote allotments, they have legally won that seat; and not just Bobby, but every other individual we elected that day.

I am not writing this to defend Bobby or anything he has said or done. His worthiness of the office of chairman will be shown in what he does with that office.

I am not saying that we should put unity over issues. Unity is important, but should not be a goal. We should never sacrifice our principles and issues for the sake of unity. That's why the system we have exists, to encourage discussion and debate. This is not disunity, as some would have you believe.

However, it is wrong to deliberately undermine an officeholder on a personal level because you are upset about election results. None of us are happy about who won the presidency last November. Even so, we are still to respect the office of the President - who is elected by the Electoral College, not by majority vote - call him out on ISSUES, and be critical of his ACTIONS.

There is no reason we are to show any less respect to our state and local offices. This isn't about Bobby. This isn't about unity. This is about who we are as Republicans.

To allow our county party's effectiveness to crumble due to petty grudges over an election for an unpaid, short-term position is inexcusable. Working together doesn't require unconditional love and devotion to an individual. It doesn’t require us to check our stand on issues at the door. But it does require enough humility to say, I am willing to consider each individual involved in the party as equally essential as myself.

We have to work together to bring our taxes down and fight new ones. We have to work together to elect good Republican candidates and keep our current elected Republicans accountable. We have to work together to raise funds for the county party. We can't do this if we are distracted by hurt feelings over an election whose winner will only hold their seat a couple of years.

The reason I am choosing to address this issue rather than that of the caucus is that we are facing a situation similar to the county chairman elections in our state chairman elections. Emotions are running high over this race, mine included. I can't say I've been pleased with the actions of all involved.

However, regardless of who wins, regardless of whether they get a pure majority vote as well as the allotted delegate vote (remember, it's the same system we used at County), we are still to respect the office of Chairman. And, regardless of who wins tomorrow, there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. I know that. We have all day Sunday to recover from our loss (or our win. Sore winners are just as bad as sore losers).

Monday morning, however, we are all on the same team again. Unless we decide beforehand to commit to supporting our chairman or chairwoman and their leadership, it will not happen.

Monday morning, we aren't Jones people or Williams people. We are all Oklahoma Republicans. Those who continue to hold to a lost candidate as their one, true hope for the party have lost more than an election; they have lost their purpose.

Let's keep our purpose. Let's remember that we were the only state in '08 to go completely Red. Let's take that victory and carry it through the 2010 elections as a team.

Jaci Greggs
Precinct 50 Vice Chairman, Cleveland County
mynewaddressis@hotmail.com
http://jaciscully.blogspot.com
http://davidandjacigreggs.blogspot.com
Politics and morality are inseparable. And as morality's foundation is religion, religion and politics are necessarily related. We need religion as a guide. We need it because we are imperfect, and our government needs the church, because only those humble enough to admit they're sinners can bring to democracy the tolerance it requires in order to survive. ~ Ronald Reagan

*You have my permission to forward, repost or duplicate this in its entirety

Amazing What a Little Logic Can Do

2009-04-14T17:59:00.001-07:00

Not mine, but I wish it was. I want to give an 'Amen' at the end of every paragraph. This week's MUST READ!!
-------------------------------

WE’RE DOING FINE, OKLAHOMA!

Earlier this week you may have received an email in support of moving Oklahoma Republicans back to a caucus system of choosing which presidential candidate receives Oklahoma’s delegate votes to become the Republican nominee for President.

Most knowledgeable Republicans who have studied the caucus proposal being promoted feel passage would be extremely devastating to our party and could set our party back over 20 years.

The information provided in support of this change to the caucus is extremely misleading and comes from individuals whose goal is to create a system that would allow a very small, well-organized minority to manipulate the process to promote their own political agenda.

Let’s analyze each statement made in support of the Caucus.

“In 1976, 1980, and 1984 the Oklahoma GOP supported Ronald Reagan for President - through a caucus system instead of a "Presidential Preference Primary".

Ronald Reagan lost the Iowa Caucus in both 1976 and 1980. He then came back and won the New Hampshire primaries. So using that logic, if New Hampshire had a caucus Ronald Reagan may have never become President. How can we empower the grassroots to support conservative leaders like Reagan in the future? Answer: Restore the Oklahoma GOP to the Caucus System?

Back to the Reagan example. In 1976 Gerald Ford won the Iowa caucus. One week later Ronald Reagan won the New Hampshire primary. In 1980 George H.W. Bush won the Iowa Caucus. The following week Ronald Reagan won the New Hampshire Primary. I don’t know of anyone who would argue that Ford and Bush 41 were more conservative than Ronald Reagan.

Counties across the State, including Oklahoma and Tulsa counties, have already passed a proposal known as "Caucus OK!" that would restore the Oklahoma GOP to a caucus system, and it will soon be heard at the State Convention, Saturday, April 18. I would invite you to visit the Caucus OK website http://caucusok.org/to learn more!

While it is true the proposal was passed in a few counties it was soundly defeated 52-28 in Cleveland County, which was perhaps the only county to have a full and open debate on the issue. Cleveland County even suspended its own convention rules to allow the principal proponent of the caucus proposal to debate for the measure. It was still soundly voted down. (I was there. It was the ONLY county in which debate was allowed, and the only county where the caucus failed, even with authors of the proposal speaking in its defense.)

"An enlarged , invigorated , and empowered grassroots volunteer and donor base will result from the restoring of the caucus system."

There is no evidence that this would be the case. Iowa has been the example given to support this assertion, claiming Iowa gets more attention and activity because of their caucus. Truth is, Iowa receives attention because they are first in the process. New Hampshire receives an equal amount of attention and they have a primary. Current RNC rules do not allow Oklahoma to conduct their selection process earlier than it is currently held, either primary or caucus. Changes are currently being discussed by the RNC and will more than likely be put into effect before the 2012 elections.

"A caucus system is a nomination process that truly reflects a consensus of the Party grassroots."

Again, there is no evidence to support this claim. In 2008 over 345,000 Oklahoma Republicans turned out to vote in the Republican Presidential Primary. If the proposed caucus were to be approved we would be telling those Republicans that we didn’t care about their opinion and that their votes didn’t matter.

"Moving to a caucus system will increase fundraising opportunities for the Party."

The change as proposed would not generate additional revenues; in fact, it would be extremely costly to the Oklahoma Republican Party, as it requires the party to furnish ballots, including absentee ballots, to all Republicans at no cost. The OKGOP would also be responsible for conducting the voting process, including having to verify whether those showing up or mailing in ballots were indeed eligible to vote.

"Moving to a caucus system will save Oklahoma tax-payer dollars (up to $3 million)."

This is not true, as the change to the caucus does not eliminate the primary. The Democrat party will still conduct their voting via a primary. It does not change the law.

"Moving to a caucus system will increase Oklahoma's influence and attention in the national election process."

Since 1988 when Oklahoma moved from the caucus to the Primary, Republicans held 32 seats in the Oklahoma House; we now hold 61. In 1988 Republicans held 15 seats in the Oklahoma Senate; we now hold 26. All in all, Oklahoma Republicans have done quite well under the current system.

CONCLUSION
The truth is a caucus system would empower a few influential activists who believe they know better than the general population what Oklahoma needs. A caucus system would establish an oligarchy which is a form of government where power effectively rests with a small elite segment of society- aka Political Pharisees. That is never good and goes completely against the principles of the U.S. Constitition which is inclusive and protects us from the establishment of an oligarchy.

Oklahoma Republican activists should be about the business of educating Oklahoma voters and encouraging more conservatives to become involved in the process. Moving to a caucus system would be a step backward in Oklahoma. We have accomplished too much with a Presidential Primary! While not a perfect system, it is infinitely better than moving back to a Caucus system. Vote No at the State Convention!

Joe FREAKIN Biden

2009-04-02T14:47:00.001-07:00

Go to Steve's Youtube site to see more goodness on the Koran, Canadian healthcare and PETA. This guy is great.

Oh, that makes sense

2009-04-01T14:52:00.000-07:00

Milk and Kool-Aid

2009-03-31T15:56:00.001-07:00

The Way Things Are

2009-03-30T08:11:00.000-07:00

I should probably explain the recent hiatus from the blog.

Oh, not that there aren't still topics and news and goings-on that are worth talking and writing and fighting about. Obviously there are. And as I can, I will post on here. But, especially after the State Convention next month, my posting here will be dropping dramatically.

The truth is I have other, larger projects going on that are going to require my attention. By larger I mean something longer than the typical 1-2 page post I put on here.

So, as I get to it, I will be posting. Otherwise, I am focusing my energies elsewhere.

Don't Caucus Me, Bro!

2009-03-02T12:36:00.000-08:00

The word “revolution” has been used to describe many beneficial or life changing events in history and right now it is being thrown around again. There are several within the Oklahoma Republican Party who are looking for another “revolution."

What many people don’t seem to realize is this: we already had an American Revolution. We had it on November 4, 2008. Our founders wisely put in place a system of government specifically designed to create the perfect set of circumstances for a bloodless revolution and transfer of governmental authority between opposing ideologies every two to four years. But that’s not the kind revolution these people are talking about.

There is a faction in the Oklahoma Republican Party, many of them people who went out last week and shook tea bags protesting that their voices weren’t heard, who are now trying to take away the voices of their neighbors. Ironic, no?

We’ve got a group among us who are so embittered by the results of the democratic process they would make Che proud. “We didn’t like the way this whole voting thing turned out. Here’s an easy solution: no more voting!”

Their reasoning? Primaries don’t elect the right candidates. Translation: we didn’t like how you chose so we’ve decided you don’t get a choice anymore.

Full disclosure - I didn't support McCain in the primary. For that matter, no one I know did. My guy didn't even come in second. And yet, I don't have a problem doing this whole "letting the people have a fair say" thing again, knowing that the potential for my candidate to lose still exists.

It’s like whenever USC or Texas or Florida doesn’t get invited to the National Championship, suddenly we have to abolish the BCS. It’s biased! It’s corrupt! Forget that it’s all based off of statistics and numbers, there’s favoritism being shown, I tell ya! And yet when they do get to go, well what do you know, this BCS thing isn’t so bad after all, and we’ll just let it slide one more year.

By the way, if you ever needed a proof-positive argument that we don’t need to abolish the BCS, here it is: Obama wants us to.

The main arguments for the caucus system, or as I like to call it, the Abolishment of the People’s Right to Vote, are mainly as follows.

1) It will encourage more honest elections

This one will take some time, but it needs to be dealt with first for the subsequent points to make sense.

In the utopian vision of an Oklahoma caucus they are presenting, it all starts in the neighborhoods. Some precinct chairman calls a meeting and invites his or her neighbors, through door-knocking or flyering or what have you. They meet in his living room and decide they are all like-minded, well-intentioned individuals who largely want to achieve the same goals, even though they may disagree on some minutia. They all then sign up to be delegates to their county convention.

Then they go to their county convention, meet more like-minded, well-intentioned individuals who largely want to achieve the same goals, and sign up to be delegates to their district convention.

At the district convention, they meet even more like-minded, well-intentioned individuals who largely want to achieve the same goals, and sign up to be delegates to the state convention.

At the state convention, they participate in a caucus as unbound delegates to elect the primary candidate for the state of Oklahoma. Everyone gets to vote for whoever they want to vote for, and at the end, no matter who wins, we’ll all join hands and sing the friendship song as we proclaim that, even if our choice for candidate lost, the best choice was made.

Did you see what happened? Unless you made it to every single meeting, you do not get to vote on who Oklahoma elects as our primary candidate. If you miss just one of these events, you have a limited amount of time in order to appeal to a board for approval to be a delegate at the next highest level. And there’s no guarantee you will be approved.

Now, in a world where the sky is blue, here’s what will happen.

We go back to the precinct chairman. He’s obviously not a dispassionate person. And he knows already who he wants to be Oklahoma’s primary candidate. So he goes door to door and visits with his neighbors and figures out which ones support his candidate and which ones do not. Then he goes home and decides the date of the precinct meeting, and guess who he conveniently forgets to invite?

Now, the objection will be raised, but those other people, they can go before the credentials committee after the fact, they can come and appeal to be a delegate, they can work around the system, it’s a built-in fix just for that.

But how will they know about that option unless their precinct chairman or some other official tells them? And even if one or two people who support another candidate does get in after all, how would that stand in proportion to a stacked deck? Because you can be sure this wouldn’t be happening in just one precinct.

Of course, those committee members are volunteers from the initial precinct meetings. And, again, there’s no guarantee your petition will be approved.

Right now, I want you to picture a person involved in the local party that you do not trust. I know it’s hard to just pick one, but for the sake of the illustration, make an effort. Can you honestly say that you know that they would have less control over the primary outcome under this caucus system than they would under a straight voting primary system?

2) It will bring people into the party.

I’m surprised anyone can say this with a straight face. Yeah, nothing encourages involvement like taking away people’s voices.

What they mean when they say this is not that it will bring people into the party in general. They mean they will have the opportunity to stack the party with more of their people, people they can control, and quash the rest of us. That’s the “more people” they are talking about bringing in. See answer #1.

3) It will elect better candidates

You can fill in the blank with whatever “better” is supposed to mean. The word “better” will be defined by the group we described under answer #1.

They have also thrown around the justification that it will help implement real campaign finance reform by ensuring that state funds don’t go to primary candidates and people will have to pay for their own campaigns.

Actually, we already have a procedure for implementing that. It’s called "legislation," and it’s pretty similar to that voting thing, so my guess is they’re against that, too.

Really, it all goes back to #1. None of these other issues matter as long as the threat of absolute control by one small group remains.

And now we see the real “revolution” they are talking about: the French Revolution, where it’s us vs. them, a fight to the death, and off with the heads (or, more accurately, expulsion from the party) of the losers, no exceptions, no inclusion, no cooperation.

How do I know? Because of this exact proposition.

They want to cut our heads off. They want to take away our voice in our own primary. They want to take our vote away because they are afraid of us. And ultimately, they want us to leave the party and let them do whatever they want to do unopposed and unchecked.

Just because you don’t like the way an election turned out doesn’t mean the problem is with the election process. Just because your team didn’t go to the BCS championship doesn’t mean the problem is with the BCS. Your team had a bad season. Be an adult, suck it up and try again next year.

Make no mistake – this is a deliberate attempt to silence voices opposing a specific political figure or agenda. The only way to prevent this is to preserve the right of the people to vote, whether it be in a primary or a general election.

Come to the county convention and help us stop this disastrous un-American proposal and keep our right to vote by standing up to remove this resolution from the county platform. Your vote depends on it.

For more on this issue, also see:

http://chathamviews.blogspot.com/2008/11/how-obama-stole-nomination-from-hillary.html

Didn't The Original One Actually Have Something To Do With Tea?

2009-02-27T08:36:00.000-08:00

I know I've gotten bad about reposting stuff lately. But this is really worth passing along.

------------------------------------------------

Tea Party Protests Sweep the Country: But What’s the Message? http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/tea-party-protests-sweep-the-country/

With protests taking place all around the country, there should be no doubt that the Tea Party movement is something real (see PJTV’s coverage of the Tea Party protests here). The voices are loud — and becoming louder with each successive demonstration. Disapproval of the stimulus/spending bill continues to grow, and I expect the crowds in places like Nashville, Kansas City, and, of course, Washington, D.C., will also continue to grow.

Still, if you’ve been unable to hear a message other than “We’re not happy,” you’re not alone. The objection to the spending bill is real, but other than objecting, what is the purpose of these protests?

An unscientific poll at Instapundit suggests we’re mostly protesting in order to elect fiscal hawks. I don’t know about you, but it seems like it would have been more effective to simply run fiscal hawks as candidates, rather than protest their absence less than five months after the election. Still, let’s say that is the driving factor for most Americans taking part in the Tea Party protests. Will we continue these protests until the 2010 elections? What if we don’t get what we want?

More importantly, what if the events taking place are momentous enough to be worthy of more than just our scattered and somewhat incoherent cries of protest? Is our only response a loud proclamation of opposition to the trampling of our rights? Are we allowed to protest with our voices as long as our bodies acquiesce? History tells us that is an empty freedom. Voices that have no force of authority behind them are weak weapons against the soft bondage of socialism and totalitarianism, and hollow voices of protest mean nothing when bodies willingly enter into a state of servitude.

It may be that we’re nowhere near that point, but the fact remains that far too many of us remain oblivious to the idea that we could ever face the reality of our individual liberty being subsumed by the State. Why? It’s not as if this concept of a servile nation is some heretofore unknown idea. More than 400 years ago, the philosopher Etienne de la Boetie wrote of this phenomenon in his Discourse on Voluntary Servitude. Speaking of Rome in the time of emperors, he said:

Tyrants would distribute largess, a bushel of wheat, a gallon of wine, and a sesterce: and then everybody would shamelessly cry, “Long live the King!” The fools did not realize that they were merely recovering a portion of their own property, and that their ruler could not have given them what they were receiving without having first taken it from them. … The mob has always behaved in this way — eagerly open to bribes that cannot be honorably accepted and dissolutely callous to degradation and insult that cannot be honorably endured.

A centuries-old philosopher describing a society that has been extinct for nearly 2,000 years, and yet it bears a remarkable similarity to the entitlements of our own generation. But bread and circuses are not for us, and neither are the promises of “new and saved jobs” if only we hand over unheard of amounts of money and power to our most distant form of government. We are not a mob. We are reasoned people. We are learned people. We have the ability to make our own decisions, and if we ever choose servility we will have no one to blame but ourselves.

I’d like to think that many of those protesting are worried about such things, even if they are still thinking about these dangers in an abstract sense. Isn’t it better to once again have a national conversation about these things, even in theory, rather than face the possibility of a constitutional crisis in which the American people are unprepared? I hope Americans will remember that we don’t need to take to the streets or fight a revolution. All we have to do is abide by our conscience. We don’t demand unreasonable things. We only demand that our property, our liberty, and our rights remain secure. We demand these things in the name of the Republic and the millions who have sacrificed their lives for these principles. We demand these things for the Americans not yet born, who are entitled to the right to their own property and should not have to tolerate the confiscation of their earnings to pay for our own sins.

I worry that, despite the Tea Party protests, too many of us will find it a bother to ever stand up for ourselves. La Boetie recognized this too. In fact, he wrote that tyrants are created by the people.

… when a thousand, a million men, a thousand cities, fail to protect themselves against the domination of one man, this cannot be called cowardly, for cowardice does not sink to such a depth, any more than valor can be termed the effort of one individual to scale a fortress, to attack an army, or to conquer a kingdom. What monstrous vice, then, is this which does not even deserve to be called cowardice, a vice for which no term can be found vile enough, which nature herself disavows and our tongues refuse to name?

I cannot accept that Americans who speak so fervently in favor of liberty are only paying lip service to that exalted ideal. I cannot believe that those who see danger in our current policies will choose to ignore the crisis and leave it up to our children to fight our battles, though they will be less equipped and less inclined to fight for their liberties. In fact, if the current situation is as dire as our pundits believe it to be, by the time our children are old enough to stand up for themselves, they will have forgotten what it means to do so.

La Boetie anticipated this as well. He believed that once liberty is lost, it becomes nearly impossible to regain, because of society’s “forgetfulness of its freedom.”

It is true that in the beginning men submit under constraint and by force; but those who come after them obey without regret and perform willingly what their predecessors had done because they had to. This is why men born under the yoke and then nourished and reared in slavery are content, without further effort, to live in their native circumstance, unaware of any other state or right, and considering as quite natural the condition into which they were born.

This is why we must be ever vigilant to our entering into a state of voluntary servitude. There are real dangers that if we leave it to the next generation to deal with the loss of liberty, they will not even recognize what they no longer have. Diminished liberty will be the new normal, and those of us who believe in limited government, the right of the individual, and the ultimate authority of the people will be left on the fringes of political philosophy. Perhaps that will not be the case, and our children will be the ones embodied with the boldness to act. They will be acting against interests that will be more entrenched and that will make their job more difficult. If we ever determine that we are in fact becoming a servile people, we cannot stand idly by while liberty is dismembered.

La Boetie wasn’t the only philosopher concerned with voluntary servitude. John Dickinson, a moderate who ultimately refused to sign the Declaration of Independence (but still fought in the Continental Army after independence was declared), believed voluntary servitude should be resisted. He, along with Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1775:

We have counted the cost of this contest, and find nothing so dreadful as voluntary slavery. Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us. As we wonder how far we may have fallen towards a state of voluntary servitude, it may help to think back to the original Tea Party participants. In 1774, as a direct consequence of the Boston Tea Party, British Parliament passed a series of punitive economic measures that came to be known in the colonies as the “Intolerable Acts.” What, I wonder, would we consider intolerable, as opposed to ill-advised or merely detrimental acts of our own Congress? The answer to that question may not be as theoretical as we think, and could help determine the future course of this nation in the months and years to come.

Trust, But Verify

2009-02-21T15:25:00.000-08:00

Have you heard the one about Obama changing the armed forces oath?

It goes like this:

One day, deciding to comment on Obama's disregard for our Constitution, a blogger wrote a satire piece, pretending to be posting a news article claiming that Obama is going to change the military oath from stating loyalty to the Constitution, to loyalty to the President, namely, Obama.

The people latched onto it and it spread like wildfire, only not the way the original blogger had intended.

Somehow, through the beauty of the internet, the satirical nature of this post was lost, and many other blogs and aggregators began treating this piece as though it were legitimate news.

The reason is obvious; it's just so darn believable.

But it's not true.

Here is the original post, clearly stating this is not to be taken seriously.

If you want a good laugh, read the comment section.

You can check it out on Snopes, too.

In the words of the Great Communicator, "Trust, but verify."

Bill to Require Full Disclosure of Adoption Fees Heads to Full Senate

2009-02-19T13:08:00.000-08:00

HAT TIP to Okiecampaigns.

A measure to create more uniformity in adoptions and ensure full disclosure of fees has cleared its first major hurdle in the Senate. Senate Bill 1029, by Sen. Steve Russell, was approved by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Russell, R-Oklahoma City, said that as an adoptive parent, it was an area of law of special concern to him.

In Oklahoma, prospective adoptive parents can utilize public and private agencies as well as attorney-assisted adoptions. Russell said while those are all good options, a 2006 grand jury investigation uncovered a number of abuses that need to be addressed, including some cases of “adoption” fees being used for personal vehicles, computers and other items.

“My legislation requires full disclosure of all fees, so that adoptive parents know exactly what is required up front and what all the fees are for,” Russell said. “We need to make sure we have a uniform standard for adoptions. Under current law, some things, like home studies, can be waived. Procedures aimed at ensuring the safety of the adoptive child should be enforced.”

SB 1029 would also ensure parents have a full disclosure of all state laws dealing with adoption as well as regulations impacting the adoption of children of Native American ancestry.

“Making sure all adoption laws and fees are completely transparent will improve the process and help eliminate the potential for abuse,” Russell said. “This is simply good public policy.”

Russell’s legislation now moves to the full Senate for further consideration.

Red Envelope Project

2009-02-13T11:54:00.001-08:00

I stumbled across this recently and thought I would pass it along.

As a method of a peaceful, tangible form of protest, someone (I haven't yet found out who) came up with the idea of the Red Envelope Project.

The Red Envelope Project is to allow anyone who can afford a stamp and chance to show President Obama that we do not support his pro-abortion and pro-infanticide policies.

Here's the idea:

Get a red envelope.

On the front, address it to:

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500

Don't put anything inside.

Seal it and on the back, write the following message:

This envelope represents one child who died in abortion. It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world. Responsibility begins with conception.

Put a stamp on it and mail it.

It's that simple.

All it costs you is the price of a stamp.

Will it do anything? You never know. There are never any guarantees.

But what will doing nothing accomplish?

"Progressive" History

2009-02-09T10:34:00.000-08:00

Amazingly, this is not a joke.

The Society to Preserve Indigenous Rights and Indigenous Traditions, aka SPIRIT, has created a petition to end the traditional Land Run Activities in Oklahoma's public schools.

Their reason? "[R]e-enacting the Land Run in public schools and in communities in Oklahoma is demeaning and humiliating to Oklahoma Indians."

Really. You can see it at the petition's blog: http://www.progressivehistorians.com/2009/02/petition-stop-land-run-re-enactments.html

Okay, I was homeschooled in elementary, so I didn't do the 2nd grade Land Run day like everyone else. But when I got into high school I helped one year when my school had Land Run day.

The little kids, some wearing cowboy hats and boots, brought basket lunches and wagons, got in teams of two or three, and raced onto the little field by our building and sat down in some arbitrary spot. Then they ate lunch.

What was missing from this little 2-minute excuse to eat lunch outside of the industrial-themed school building? Any overt or implicit acts of hatred, bigotry or racism.

Seriously, what do these people think, that teachers tell the kids to scream "Kill the redskins!" when they run? That they force some poor randomly-selected children to "play Indian" and try to scalp the "Boomers" as they find the most level ground to lay out their Lunchables?

Incidentally, for those of you not from here, this is where the term Boomer Sooner comes from. But that's another blog.

Have these SPIRIT people considered that the majority of these schoolkids, unless they are first-generation Oklahomans, are most likely part-Indian, like me?

I would copy and paste some of their group and rally pictures here to give you an idea of the way they are demeaning and humiliating Oklahoma tribes with their antagonism to those of us not living on government benefits, but these are probably the kind of people who would sue me in spite of Fair Use.

If you want to see them, you can look at their myspace page.

I guess this is what happens when you have so much time on your hands you've got nothing to do but sit and think about all the ways you can play victim.

Where Were You?

2009-02-06T08:56:00.000-08:00

This previous Sunday, February 1st, was the Legislative Prayer Gathering here in Oklahoma. I posted the press release on here. Invited people to it on facebook and through email. And all of you people who told me "he's your president now, too, remember to pray for him," if you knew me at all, then you knew it was happening.

My question is: where were you?

Where were you Sunday afternoon when over 200 people gathered at our State Capitol to prayer walk for our leaders?

Where were you, pastors and Sunday School teachers who are supposed to lead us and teach us the Scripture, which happens to include how we are supposed to intercede for all our governmental authority, which the Bible states is established by God?

Where were you, who have come back and haughtily proclaimed victory in this last election cycle as though it was of your own doing?

Where were you, the perennial apathetic holier-than-thou who considers yourself above such worldly goings-on, like developing an active political conscience?

If you really meant what you said the necessity and responsibility of praying for our leadership, if you really believed what the Bible said in I Timothy 2 about offering intercession for all in authority, if you really practiced what you preached - you would have been there.

This was your chance to put your money where your mouth is. But now we know the truth.

Communism Was Just a Red Herring

2009-01-28T13:01:00.000-08:00

The circumstances surrounding the appointment to Hillary’s Senate seat are more murky than Lake Thunderbird.

On the one hand, we’ve got Kirsten Gillibrand. We’re supposed to believe Gillibrand is a miraculous appointment for conservatives. She’s ~~pro-life~~(see update), opposed the last bailout, endorsed by the NRA, supports English as the official language, opposes amnesty for illegal aliens...

Can we say “overkill”? This push push push to get us to be excited over Gillibrand makes me suspicious.

The most obvious question is: if she is a genuine conservative, why is she a Democrat in the first place? You don’t arbitrarily choose a political party; at least, people seeking elected office don’t.

And, if she is so openly and obviously conservative, why did a Democrat governor appoint her to Hillary Clinton’s senate seat? Doesn’t really seem like a logical succession.

And why is everyone trying so hard to sell Conservatives on this woman? She's a Democrat appointed by a Democrat Governor to a Democrat's vacated Senate seat during a Democrat Presidency. Shouldn't they be justifying their choice to the Democrats? And since when did they care what we think?

The flip-side to this fishy coin is Caroline Kennedy.

Why was Caroline Kennedy rejected? Princess Caroline released a statement saying she withdrew herself from consideration, and then the Governor said, “No, we rejected her. Too many personal issues.” So, to quote someone whose name escapes me, Princess Caroline was uninvited to the party and then said, “Well, I didn’t want to go anyway.”

Since when have “personal issues” ever stood in the way of advancing a Kennedy’s political career?

Was she having an affair? Think her daddy got away with that over and over.

Was it the alleged “nanny issues”? Wouldn’t employing an illegal immigrant be something of a resume booster for a liberal?

Did she kill someone? Hello, Uncle Teddy.

At least they were smart enough not to play the inexperience card. After Obama, no one will ever believe that again.

So what’s the deal? Why did Princess Caroline of Camelot get snubbed for a seat that she should have been able to walk into?

Is it possible there was some pay-to-play involved? After the recent Blago incident, they wouldn’t want another high-profile person so easily connected to Obama to be involved in yet another scandal so soon, and to a seat vacated by not only Obama’s main primary opponent but also his new Secretary of State.

Ultimately, this is all moot. I don’t live in New York, and even if I did, I wouldn’t have had a vote, since she was selected, not elected.

So why am I writing about it? Because this is a teachable moment. Trust, but verify.

Don’t get too excited about Gillibrand. Let’s see if she lives up to the hype first.

And she may be all we’re supposed to think she is. But let’s not assume she is until she proves it by standing up to Obama and the rest of the Democrat cronies on the Hill. That will be the litmus test.

I have a hunch about which way she will go, but we’ll just have to wait and see.

UPDATE: Gillibrand votes to reinstate federal funding to foreign abortions. That's the pro-life claim out.

Photographing the President

2009-01-23T12:13:00.000-08:00

Normally, I wouldn't direct you to an external link if I could avoid, if only for simplification's sake.

But I ran across this photo essay on TIME online, and there's no way to embed it here. Take a couple of minutes and watch. It's a very respectful tribute to President Bush by two photographers assigned to cover him for TIME.

TIME: Photographing the President

No More Excuses

2009-01-22T08:54:00.000-08:00

We need to respect the office of the president regardless of who is in office. Remember to pray for our President the way we prayed for the last one. He’s your President, too, and you need to honor this historic achievement.

These sentiments largely come from people who fall into one of two categories: the self-righteous churchy people who only pay passing attention to politics and thought Sarah Palin was the one who said America had 57 states, or the ones who wished assassination on our President and prayed for failure on our troops.

Frankly, neither of these groups have retained any credibility with me in the area of politics throughout this process. There’s no point in addressing them.

However, a group that does need to be addressed is the race-brokers, following in the footsteps of those who have made a living profiting on race relations, like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

Here is an example of the attitude among the race-brokers. The following bolded text is in response to something I posted (but did not author) on facebook. I have not edited these statements, except to remove the identity of the poster.

I don't expect London to fully understand what the historical significance of this moment in the United States means to us Americans. The ignoring of the fact that only 60 years ago blacks were not allowed to be at the inauguration, and now we are inaugurating our first black President- Barack Obama. Hopefully your country can reach the point when they elect their first African, Indian, Asian, etc. Prime Minister since you beat us to the punch electing Thatcher first woman Prime Minister. So National Enquirer, I mean, London Daily Mail I reject your sarcastic congratulations...

At this moment the politics are not the issue. And what indication have I ever gave that I am judging him based on his color? What irks me is the mocking of the moment, this moment that us as Americans need to get past the ghosts of our nasty and violent past when it comes to race. And realize the work we still have to do (like distribution of the song "Barack the Magic Negro") The Dream has not been fulfilled with the election of President Obama, but it is one step closer to what Dr. King dreamed of. To not recognize this moment and to mock it's significance is just wrong. I would give the same response if a Woman, Black, Asian, Native American, or Hispanic conservative were being sworn in today. I would like to be judged by the content of my character which includes my recognizing that we have come so far and to not salute America for that and mocking it would be a lapse in judgment and indeed a character flaw.

Our first Half-rican (half African) President. And that is history. It don't mater what anyone says. Not preference over any other race just a fact and one that history books will document for all time. There are still racial barriers and racism all around this country as well as in the world. And not only towards blacks but also for whites. There is no way to deny that. When you get the dirty peering looks and the racial slurs, that is real. When both blacks and whites give you crap for being in an interracial relationship, that's a real barrier. No one should vote for someone based on race, nor one should one deny the significance of this great moment. We need to pray for the President and that our country moves past the polarizing partisanship on issues that need togetherness (Immigration, the Economy, etc.). And my party needs to, as Oprah says, get with the program. Chip Saltsman needs not to become the leader of my party. It would be a step backward for a RNC trying to reach out.

So I ask, not just the person above, but everyone who has spoken or written these same type of things: is it issues or is it race? While insisting that race isn’t the issue, the only thing you’ve talked about is race. (I also question the statement that 60 years ago blacks weren’t even allowed to attend inaugurations. Citation, please.)

Barack Obama is half-black, and that’s why you say this election is so important. You keep telling me to support this guy, respect this guy, follow this guy, and then give me no reason to do so – outside of his skin color.

But that is not who he is, that’s not the quality of his character, the essence of his nature, not by the standards we have been taught to use to assess an individual.

Barack Obama is a socialist Marxist who wants to “spread the wealth around” by stealing from the earners and giving to the non-earners.

Barak Obama wants to undermine traditional marriage by repealing the Defense of Marriage Act.

Barack Obama, who said he doesn’t know when life begins, called children “punishment,” equated pregnancy with an STD, and actively opposed mandating that babies born alive after botched abortions should be given life support, thus allowing them to starve to death or succumb to their injuries.

Barack Obama has already committed to using my tax dollars to fund abortions in foreign countries.

Barack Obama wants to weaken our security by pandering to evil dictatorial regimes such as Iran and Cuba.

Barack Obama wants to restrict our constitutional right to keep and bear arms, thus denying American citizens some of those “negative liberties” he said he isn’t too fond of.

That’s who Barack Obama really is. At least do yourself the courtesy of being intellectually honest enough with yourself to admit that you don’t care.

And just to make sure you have ample opportunity to be aware of who Barack Obama is, I’m going to add another area to the right side of my blog to track exactly what ch-ch-ch-changes he brings on my country.

Consider it my “Thank You” card to you, who voted for the historic election of a pro-abortion, pro-infanticide, pro-gay marriage, anti-gun Marxist.

Goodbye, President Bush

2009-01-20T08:54:00.000-08:00

Thank you for eight years of pro-life, pro-gun, pro-family, pro-national security leadership that kept us safe after the worst attack in our nation's history, and subsequently liberated millions of men, women and children from tyranny. I will miss you.

And this time next year - after FOCA, government-funded stem cell research, high inflation and unemployment, socialized health care, and gun control that would make the Clintons blush - I have a feeling even some of your so-called "Conservative" critics will, too.

Via con Dios.

Required reading: National Review's Symposium on the Bush White House.

I (Still) Have a Dream

2009-01-19T11:54:00.000-08:00

This being Martin Luther King, Jr. day, I have been forced to recognize the injustice that still exists in our culture. There is a silent minority out there as yet unchampioned.

They may not seem silent, because when you are in a bar with them they are usually the ones dancing on the tables. But yet, they have been oppressed throughout our culture’s history and still continue to be to this day.

They have been movie stars, professional athletes, mayors, senators, teachers and CEOs.

But until we elect a blonde female President, blonde women will continue to be viewed with a sense of bigotry and derision.

You may protest, but I don’t have anti-blonde sentiment! That’s something that only the uneducated or people from a certain region of the country suffer from! I’m much more progressive than that.

But be honest: we all have told blonde jokes, haven’t we? And those jokes invariably involve a blonde woman. And until you have lived as a blonde woman, you don’t know what it’s like to be judged for your hair color.

Blonde women suffer from discrimination on a daily basis, being turned down for jobs because we as a society have equated blondeness with dumbness. Or, only being given jobs involving menial tasks that brunettes and redheads won’t do, like answering phones and giving manicures.

We need to elect a blonde woman as President to cleanse us of our anti-blonde heritage.

We let them be celebrities, but don’t take them seriously in positions of power. Sure, there are blonde female congressmen(persons, excuse me), mayors, governors, cabinet members, secretaries of state, but not a president yet. And until there is a blonde president, blonde women will forever suffer from over 150 years of blonde-ist culture.

This is especially important to me, as I have blonde female relatives. My sister is a blonde woman, in fact. And until a blonde woman is elected president, she will never realize how far she can go and what her potential is. Until a blonde woman is elected president, she will continue to be viewed and to view herself as a second-class citizen.

Since it may be too much to ask our culture to abandon all our anti-blonde prejudice at once, we can concede to electing a partially blonde woman, which is why I am officially throwing my support for the next Democrat primary to Hilary Clinton.

I know that Hilary is only as blonde as the hairdresser makes her, but still, we should at least try to get a partially-blonde, or “half-blonde,” into office. This might make the election of a real blonde female president more palpable for those who still carry blonde-ist sentiments.

Now, I know what you are thinking. How can I, a Reagan conservative, endorse someone like Hilary Clinton for the Democratic Presidential candidate, possibly even President?

Frankly, it’s time we moved beyond our partisan political convictions and focus more on what’s good for our culture, for society. And really, what does a little thing like abortion matter when we could be making history? Why should I let something like the Second Amendment stand in the way of the most historic Presidential nomination in the history of our country?

Yes, she’s pro-abortion, pro-gun control, anti-military, against traditional marriage – but this is history! This may be our one chance to elect a half-blonde woman to the White House! To oppose such a monumental achievement would be rather bigoted and narrow-minded of me, wouldn’t it?

I can’t use my beliefs as an excuse to practice even more blonde-ist voting. The only way to prove to the world and my blonde or half-blonde friends that I have risen above the cultural blonde-ist sentiment is to support a half-blonde candidate for President.

So I challenge you, my fellow conservatives, set aside your personal beliefs and bring justice and validation to blonde women everywhere by joining me in supporting Hilary Clinton.

After all, isn’t history more important than the future of our country?

Homeschooling Threatened

2009-01-15T09:33:00.000-08:00

In Oklahoma, of all places.

Sen. Mary Easley, a Democrat from an undetermined municipality, has proposed legislation to remove the homeschooling exemption from state truancy laws. Yes, you read that right. Homeschooling would no longer be viewed as a legitimate education option for your children and therefore would no longer be protected from being prosecuted as truancy, penalties which include having your children removed from your custody.

5-to-1 Easley has connections to the OEA. (This matter is still being investigated.)

The original language of the truancy law reads “An attendance officer, any school administrator, or designee of the school administrator who is employed by the school, or any peace officer may, except for children being home schooled pursuant to Section 10-105 of the Oklahoma Statutes, temporarily detain and assume temporary custody of any child subject to compulsory full-time education, during hours in which school is actually in session, who is found away from the home of such child and who is absent from school without lawful excuse within the school district that such attendance officer, peace officer or school official serves…”

The new language in Easley’s bill removes the bolded phrase excepting homeschooled children. To read the bill, click here.

This is the same woman who apparently lives in a different district than she represents, doctored her mileage reimbursement papers to hide that fact, and has also proposed legislation to remove term limits on elected officials.

This is a big deal to me because I was homeschooled for eight years, all through elementary and junior high. I transitioned easily into a private high school, was ranked in the top ten of my class, and got a full four-year scholarship to the state university of my choice. I know many people still have the skewed vision of homeschoolers living like the Amish,* and some do, but the majority of us are well-rounded civically-aware and socially-active products of parental teaching and guidance. And we win all the spelling bees.

We need to get Mary Easley out of office. (Can we send someone to Tulsa to recruit a Republican? Anyone? Bueller?) This is one dangerous, crazy waster of taxpayer dollars. But until that happens, we need to fight her tooth and nail on every piece of legislation she has proposed.

Flood Sen. Easley’s office with phone calls and email. Tell her you do not support either of these measures she has proposed. If I find out about anything else this moron tries to put over on us, I’ll let you know.

Phone: (405) 521-5590
Email: easley@oksenate.gov
----------------------------------------
*I mean no disrespect to the Amish, just to those who think all homeschoolers bake their own bread and never cut their hair.

The Duty of Nations

2009-01-14T11:31:00.000-08:00

Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
I Timothy 2:1-4

"Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor...And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our national government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best."
George Washington
-------------------------------------
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

LEGISLATIVE PRAYER GATHERING 2009: Press Release - For Immediate Release

On Super Bowl Sunday — February 1, 2009 the day before Oklahoma’s 54th legislative session begins, the fifth annual Legislative Prayer Gathering will be held at the State Capitol.

The event will be held on the floor of both the house and senate chambers from 2:00 to 3:00 PM. Participants will be offered the opportunity to actually sit in the chair of their state representative and/or senator and pray for that office holder (and others) for one hour.

The hope is to have each of the 101 seats in the house chambers as well as each of the 48 seats in the senate chambers occupied with citizens in prayer for that hour. To fulfill this goal, at least 149 participants are needed. Additional seating is available in both the house and the senate gallery. Participants are encouraged to park on the west side of the capitol and enter the west side of the building through the doors under the green awning. Guides will be present to provide direction.

Special thanks to Rep. Mike Reynolds, Sen. Jim Reynolds, Prayer Force One, Bott Radio Network, the Oklahoma Family Policy Council, www.PrayerMetro.com, Barnabas Ministries Inc., Reclaim Oklahoma for Christ, and Oklahoma Conservative PAC for sponsoring this event. Other groups are invited to participate and all are encouraged to attend and pray for our nation and our leaders in Oklahoma.
-------------------------------------------
For more information, click here.

A Side Note, Literally

2009-01-09T08:30:00.000-08:00

If you haven't yet, check out the new conservative entertainment blog aggregator, Big Hollywood. I have linked to it on my right-hand side link list.

I love entertainment news, and this puts a filter on it that I can appreciate.

The Entrance of Thy Words Giveth Light

2009-01-05T17:57:00.000-08:00

Watch the subsequent parts, then share this. Everyone needs to see this.

The Right to Own and Carry

2009-01-01T10:20:00.000-08:00

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." Thomas Jefferson, Quoting 18th Century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764.)

“[T]he right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The Second Amendment.

If there is one message I could give our state legislature, one piece of legislation I would insist on being passed, it would be to allow students to carry concealed weapons on campus. The bill to allow students to carry concealed weapons on campus is being reintroduced this session. This is the most important piece of legislation this session. I have written about this before, but this is a new legislative session and it bears repeating.

The majority of arguments against Concealed Carry on Campus (CCC) hinge on emotionally-manipulative hypothetical situations: What if some person who had a gun didn’t take their medication that day, allegedly like the Virginia Tech shooter, and just snapped? What if someone had a handgun in their room and their roommate accidentally killed themselves? What if someone is carrying at a party where there are drugs and alcohol? What if, what if, what if.

All of these arguments may be persuasive on the face, but they ignore the facts of the issue.

The second amendment says that American citizens have the right to “keep and bear arms.” Literally translated into modern English, that means the right to own and carry weapons.

This means that the right for students possessing concealed carry permits to carry their weapons with them on campus already exists, and current laws that prohibit such are unconstitutional.

Therefore, any person who does not support CCC cannot call themselves a conservative.

Any elected official who votes against CCC has taken a proactive stance in opposing a constitutional right, and thereby breaking their oath to uphold the constitution.

Oklahoma is a “shall-issue” state, meaning that anyone who applies and qualifies for a concealed carry permit is given one. If you can go to the movies, the grocery store, a restaurant or the bowling alley with the knowledge that anyone student-age in there could be carrying, then logically you should have no qualms about these same individuals carrying on campus.

This is my New Year’s resolution, as far as this blog is concerned: to address the issue of CCC, to dismantle the arguments against CCC, to provide you with resources regarding CCC, and to be the burr on the backside of every state elected official I can get my virtual hands on until they pass CCC.

I state this plainly because I know that there are people I work with in the political arena, both elected official and not, who oppose this Constitutional right. Just letting you know: until I change your mind, I’m not going to stop talking about it.

Happy New Year.

Thank You

2008-12-24T10:10:00.000-08:00

A Savior, Who is Christ the Lord

2008-12-22T09:00:00.000-08:00

“I’m so sick of the secularization of Christmas.”
“I’m tired of Christians being caught up in the commercialism of Christmas.”
“I can’t wait for Christmas to be over.”

Have you heard any of these over the last couple of weeks? Have you said them?

I know that, for many Christians, the struggle between having the wonderful, memorable, traditional family Christmas and keeping our eyes on Jesus can be very frustrating. We see the anti-Christian Christmas bus ads or the sign in the Washington state capitol placed next to the nativity saying that Christianity is all just a myth, and it’s easy to get distracted and angry and frustrated. I know I do.

Of course, while we can't choose the pressures that come into our life, we can choose our reactions to them. Some people decide on constructive, pro-active responses to the commercialization/secularization issue, such as The Advent Conspiracy.

I don’t mean to imply that I don’t have same kind of stress about making sure all the family is visited and bought for and all that stuff. But I have found that the most effective way of keeping my focus is to immerse myself in Christmas music. But, like everything else popular involving Christmas, Christmas songs/carols/hymns/whatever-you-want-to-call-them have become marginalized, not by the secular world, but by the church.

This year, Christmas at our church has felt different. Well, really, holidays in general have felt different. I know that our church was always unique in its recognition of the non-religious holidays such as Independence Day and Memorial Day, but frankly, I’ve always considered that a good thing. If the church isn’t going to publicly, corporately thank God for His provision and blessing for our country and for our freedom, who else will? But back to topic….

Christmas has felt somewhat acknowledged this year, rather than savored, like the in-law you’re obligated to be polite to but can’t really wrap your arms around. Oh, we’ve done the Christmas boxes and other outreach programs that usually occupy December. I don’t mean it in that sense.

Building up to Christmas this year, we sang a couple of carols (a.k.a Christmas-themed hymns) a week, except for this last Sunday, Christmas Sunday, when we sang a nice little medley and a choir special I particularly enjoy. (I still can’t remember what “Noel” means. I should google it.)

Where I sit in church places me in the line of sight of several staff members during worship, both on stage and off, and it’s really hard not be a little voyeuristic. I noticed several members of our leadership were not only not singing – they looked downright bored. Until, of course, the non-seasonal songs of their preference came up, and then the eyes were closed and the arms were raised. And then, of course, twenty minutes later we are (correctly) told we should be able to worship without regard to our personal stylistic preference.

I’m sorry, but what part of “Mild He lays His glory by/Born that man no more may die/Born to raise the sons of earth/Born to give them second birth” doesn’t absolutely thrill you, as a believer?

I know I’m just a girl in the congregation, so my words will mean nothing to the church hierarchy, but it seems like we have been so (rightly) focused on worshiping Jesus as he is today, we forget to be thankful to God for sending him in the first place.

After all, that’s what Christmas really is all about. It’s the Christian Thanksgiving, not just Jesus’ birthday party. It is to take a day or a season to focus on specifically thanking God for sending us Jesus so that he was able to reconcile us to God, as the (Christmas) song says.

And that’s what the Christmas music is about. It seems like we have pushed it to the side, as though we should acknowledge it so we don’t make anyone mad but not really focus too much on it because we like our contemporary praise and worship theme we’ve been building on.

But, unless you are singing Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, you are singing praise to God, whether in adoration or thanksgiving.

If the commercialization of Christmas distracts you, it’s not commercialization’s fault.

If you can’t worship God through Christmas songs, it’s not the songs’ fault.

Here are the lyrics from my favorite song rendition this year, a juxtaposition of two traditional songs. Next time you’re getting overwhelmed by the pressures of this week, recall these words, think of the men who wrote them, and the reason we sing them. It’s better than any 7/11 song you’ll sing all year.

God rest ye merry, gentlemen
Let nothing you dismay
Remember, Christ, our Savior
Was born on Christmas day
To save us all from Satan's power
When we were gone astray
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy
From God our Heavenly Father
A blessed Angel came;
And unto certain Shepherds
Brought tidings of the same:
How that in Bethlehem was born
The Son of God by Name.
O tidings of comfort and joy,
Comfort and joy
O tidings of comfort and joy
Born a King on Bethlehem's plain
Gold I bring to crown Him again
King forever, ceasing never
Over us all to rein
Glorious now behold Him arise
King and God and Sacrifice
Alleluia, Alleluia
Worship Him, God Most High

O Star of wonder, star of night
Star with royal beauty bright
Westward leading, still proceeding
Guide us to Thy perfect light

God bless us, every one.

Happy Holidays?

2008-12-17T07:57:00.000-08:00

Just to put you in the "holiday" mood....

This is an email written by a member of the Oklahoma GOP to his daughter's teacher, presumably elementary teacher.

If this doesn't make you want to say "Merry Christmas" to every Target cashier, I don't know what will.
----------------------------------------
I had to post this email I sent to my kid's teacher yesterday. They had to do an assignment to draw pictures depicting each step in the Kwanzaa holiday. Last year my oldest daughter had to sing Kwanzaa songs in choir while also singing Christmas carols. I just could not take this crap any more. This is the email I sent. Feel free to google anything below to verify what I said is true. Don't let your kids get this kind of communist propaganda from a self described racist and Marxist!
----------------------------------------
Madison and I think you are a wonderful teacher and we both agree that she has learned a lot and enjoys your class. However, I wanted to write you about something I am very concerned about.

Why is my child learning about and honoring a Marxist and Racist holiday invented by a convicted felon?

If the Ku Klux Klan invented a holiday would we celebrate that as well in the name of "multiculturalism?" My child last year during chorus had to sing Kwanzaa during Christmas. I bit my lip but no more. This is NOT AN AFRICAN FESTIVAL. It was completely fabricated by a left wing angry racist ex-convict.

Did you know?:

1. "When Maulana Karenga was asked to distinguish Kawaida, the philosophy underlying Kwanzaa, from "classical Marxism," he essentially explained that under Kawaida, we also hate whites.”

2. The seven principles of Kwanzaa are the very same seven principles of the Symbionese Liberation Army, in 1974, Patricia Hearst, kidnap victim-cum-SLA revolutionary, posed next to the banner of her alleged captors, a seven-headed cobra. Each snake head stood for one of the SLA's revolutionary principles: Umoja, Kujichagulia, Ujima, Ujamaa, Nia, Kuumba and Imani — the same seven "principles" of Kwanzaa.

3. Just five years after his invention of Kwanzaa, he was convicted of torturing two black women by stripping them naked, beating them with electrical cords, placing a hot iron into the mouth of one and mangling the toe of the other in a vice. During the ordeal, he forced them to drink detergent.

Did you know any of this? If not, now that you do are you going to continue to propagandize our children?

I do not want any more assignments given to my child in this regard. I also strongly suggest you inform other parents of the details of this holiday and of the person who INVENTED it. I will pass this email on to other parents I know. However, I do not plan to escalate this issue unless Madison is punished in some way or continues to receive disguised communism lessons written by self described Marxists.

Thank you for your understanding. The direct tone of this letter is not directed at you. I don’t know if you invent these lessons or simply have them dictated to you by the Chapel Hill School system. If you wish to discuss this further please contact me. I will be happy to come and in and discuss this face to face with you and the Principal.

I wish you and your loved ones a Merry Christmas.

BOOMER SOONER!!!!

2008-12-13T18:08:00.000-08:00

BOOMER SOONER!!!

Fallout

2008-12-12T09:43:00.000-08:00

I usually refrain from reposting things here (aside from entertaining videos, like the one below), but I wanted to share this with you. Mike McNutt is pretty hit-and-miss when it comes to his analysis, but at least he reported it.

Boomer Sooner.
-----------------------------------------------------
Law sought to prove candidate citizenship in Oklahoma
Lawmaker wary of Obama record
BY MICHAEL MCNUTT
December 12, 2008
http://newsok.com/law-sought-to-prove-candidate-citizenship/article/3329625

Theresa Cao speaks about President-elect Barack Obama's proof of U.S. citizenship outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Friday Dec. 5, 2008. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

A state lawmaker, motivated by swirling questions on whether President-elect Barack Obama meets the U.S. Constitution’s citizenship requirement, said Thursday he will file a bill requiring anyone who files for office in Oklahoma to show proof of citizenship.

"This could have taken care of the whole thing if we had a state law that any candidate has to show it up front,” said Rep. Mike Ritze, R-Broken Arrow.

Under a proposed bill by Ritze, all candidates, from those running for district attorney to president, would be required to provide a copy of a certified birth certificate and a driver’s license or some other form of government-issued identification at the time they file with the state Election Board.

No identification is required to file for an office with the state Election Board, although candidates sign an affidavit stating that they are registered voters.

Ritze, a physician, said he has a master’s degree in forensics and has had extensive training in analyzing documents and has read about the documents the Democratic president-elect has submitted.

Ritze said he does not believe Obama submitted an authentic copy of his birth certificate.

Oklahoma Democratic Party Chairman Ivan Holmes said he hadn’t seen the proposed legislation, but it appears to "be another typical Republican ploy of sour grapes.”

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to Obama’s electoral eligibility Monday. More challenges are pending.

The Obama campaign last summer produced copies of his birth certificate, which showed he was born in a Honolulu hospital Aug. 4, 1961. It had a Web site, fightthesmears.com, to refute what it calls misinformation about Obama.

"Both our national and state constitutions are clear in what they require for a person to be qualified to hold elected office,” Ritze said.

"If a person can’t prove their citizenship, they have no business attempting to represent the people of this state.”

Happy Birthday, Ann!!!

2008-12-11T09:26:00.000-08:00

I'm going to go reread Godless now. Guilty comes out December 30th.

FAIL: They're At It Again

2008-12-04T12:01:00.000-08:00

Cleveland County is trying to screw us over again.

A short while ago, Norman City Council took a section of the city and exempted it from property taxes, the idea being that it would encourage retailers to come there and generate a bunch of sales tax revenue for the city. Which sounds great. I'm all about exempting as many people and places from taxes as possible. And, so far, the plan seems to be working. Retailers moved into the area and are doing well.

But of course, we've hit a snag. Cleveland County wants a new jail. And they are supposed to use Norman property taxes to pay for that jail. And now they don't quite have the income they are used to and were expecting to put toward said jail.

The answer? Raise county sales tax!

This means that those of us who live in Moore and Oklahoma City and every other city that is in Cleveland County will get our sales taxes raised to pay for Norman's jail.

I know what you're going to say, that it's a county jail and we live in Cleveland County so it's only fair that we be taxed, too.

No. This was the Norman City Council's doing, and now they are trying to make Moore, SOKC, Noble, Box, Clothier, Corbett, Denver, Slaughterville, Little Axe, Maguire, McKiddyville, Hall Park, Etowah, Franklin, Lexington, Needmore, Spring Hill, Stella and Willow View city residents pay Norman's sales tax for Norman's jail the way we are having to pay for Norman's library and Norman's roads.

And you Norman city residents shouldn't be too excited about this, either. This is your city council that screwed this all up, and now they are literally passing the buck to you, as usual. Haven't you had enough of these guys?

This is the Norman City Council's fault. Let them fix it without penalizing the rest of us.

The vote to increase the sales tax is this Tuesday! Of course, the sneaky little creeps haven't exactly advertised it.

So, already this year, we in SOKC have had to pay extra sales tax for the Maps for Millionaires so Clay Bennet has something to do on Friday nights. And we got extra sales taxes for the transaction between Tinker AFB and GM (there's your bailout, already). We also got our property taxed raised in the summer to go towards Norman's library. Now they are trying to make us pay even higher sales tax for the jail in Norman.

Don't let them get away with it. Vote no.
------------------------------
By the way, I wouldn't have even heard about this if it weren't for Rep. Mike Reynolds. He's the reason you are hearing about it and are aware that you have the opportunity to vote 'No.' Just FYI.
-------------------------------
UPDATE: There's been some confusion as to the nature of the city/county property tax. Let me try and clear this up. The entire county's property taxes were to be put toward the jail without the creation of a new tax. But because Norman made certain areas property tax exempt, they can't pony up their share of the building fund, so they want to increase sales tax throughout the county to make up the difference.

I will also add, we need to be concerned about the fact that this tax is being used to fund a one-time project - building a building - and that the tax will continue once the intended use for it is past, or after the building is built. It's not like once the jail is completed they're going to say, okay, finished that one, we can lower your sales tax back. Remember the Ford Center.
-------------------------------
Here is an image of the ballot. Note the stated yet still oddly vague supposed time-limit on the tax. (Click the image for larger view).

Also, they want to increase the sales tax a full percentage! That would make Cleveland County sales tax over 9%, making it the highest in the Central OK area. That'll be great for the economy.

-------------------------------
The measure passed 63%-37%. That's still 36.5% more than I expected. At least we tried. We'll get 'em next time.

And I Love It

2008-12-04T10:50:00.000-08:00

Probably the most offensive, controversial, politically incorrect statement I've heard all year.

It was God who made me so beautiful. If I weren't, then I'd be a teacher.
- Linda Evangelista

Why Homosexuals Need to Support Prop 8

2008-11-25T10:12:00.000-08:00

Okay, "support" is probably too strong a word. Maybe "surrender" is more accurate.

The incidents involving Prop. 8 protesters (a.k.a. the “anti-voting crowd”) disrupting church services, allegedly sending fake anthrax letters, pressuring ideological opponents to quit their jobs, blaming the black vote, and trying to shut down businesses who donated to Prop. 8 supporters are now, hopefully, common knowledge.

Am I the only one who finds this ironic? Maybe even humorously so?

Let me just speak to the anti-Prop. 8 crowd, homosexuals and heterosexuals alike. (If any of them even read this, which I doubt, but just in case….)

Aside from the horrible PR you’ve given yourselves by harassing churches and church-goers, boycotting businesses and hurling racist epithets, do you realize that’s you’ve shot yourselves in the foot when it comes to your own civil rights?

Did you know that on the same day Prop. 8 passed, half a dozen pro-life measures failed by a vote of the people in the states they were introduced?

Where are the pro-life riots? Don’t cite some random clinic shooting from the distant past. Where are the pro-life rioters today? Where is the bile and hate being spewed by the pro-life crowd?

The fact is, we lost that one. We know it. We’ll try again. That’s how it works. That’s how America works.

You don’t get that. And you aren’t forward-thinking enough right now to care. Negating a vote of the people – twice – just because you don’t like it, devalues the vote itself. Including yours.

If you can get this referendum overturned, then what happens? When the next vote goes the way you want, what happens when the opposing school of thought gets THAT one overturned?

Guess what? You created the precedent allowing it.

I say this in love, but it’s time to suck it up and admit defeat in this battle. Thrashing around like a collective Tasmanian devil at everyone who disagrees with you won’t get you what you want. Or worse, if it does, it will come back to haunt you later.

How Obama Got Elected

2008-11-18T12:19:00.000-08:00

http://howobamagotelected.com/

UPDATED: Hiatus

2008-11-13T10:21:00.000-08:00

Please don't mistake my recent absence for a lack of interest or for red-state flu. Life has just been very busy since Nov. 4.

In case you haven't heard it enough, Oklahoma had a great night last Tuesday. Dana Murphy won the Corporation Commissioner position in one of the most key races in the state against nationally-funded gay activism poster boy Jim Roth, another one of Aubrey McClendon's failed investments. It's always a great feeling when the candidate who was outspent 4-1 wins.

We took a majority in the State Senate for the first time in forever, which involved Nancy Riley getting burned for costing us the majority last time. That felt good. And Sally Kern was also re-elected against a nationally-funded candidate. Grassroots conservatism is alive and well in Oklahoma, thank God!!

Right now, we've still got one battle being fought. State Senator Jim Reynolds is facing an ACORN travesty. His challenger, David Boren (no relation to that David Boren), also nationally-funded, is requesting multiple recounts of ACORN-tainted votes. Right now, the recount is in progress and Jim is still ahead. I'll update when we get final word. UPDATE: Jim gained 2 votes in the recount, winning the election. However, a hearing has been scheduled to investigate "voting irregularities on both sides." (I'm sure.)

We didn't lose any Republican US seats, which is also a huge win, considering our guys haven't been behaving well recently. However, they're still doing better than any liberal would in their positions, so I am thankful they retained their seats. And, in part because of their wins, the Democrats were kept from their super majority in Congress. Huge, huge victory.

And yes, Obama won. The first half-black man in the history of the United States to become President. Congratulations. Now let's see if he can manage to solve more problems than he causes.

Now we shoot for 2010 to take back Congress like we did in 1994 and elect a Republican governor in 2010. (There is an underground effort to recruit JC Watts. I doubt he'll go for it, but we can dream.)

Prop. 8 passed in California, a huge win for traditional values. And as usual, the crowd who preaches "tolerance" the loudest is assaulting the elderly and stomping on crosses, trying to get the courts to yet again overturn the will of the people. Good luck with holding the public's sympathy on that, guys.

So now, life goes on. And I am letting you know now, my activity on here may be less than before. I am turning my focus to larger projects, and as such need to limit dividing my mind. Or, to usa an analogy, I'm starting to train for a marathon, and while the sprints have been good, I need to start aiming a bit higher.

I know you don't know how you'll get on without reading my posts every few days. Don't worry. You'll be fine. And I'll be back whenever there's something noteworthy, which there will be. OK Legislative session starts soon, so there will be plenty to talk about!

See you then!

Obama Doesn't Understand Insurance

2008-10-31T09:29:00.001-07:00

This was written by my brilliant husband, State Farm FSR extraordinaire! Really clears up the insurance issue.

--------------------------------------------------------

I should have gone on about this earlier, but I didn’t feel it necessary, or really, I just didn’t want to take the time. I wish I would have before because I could have pointed out many of Obama’s misunderstandings and explained things to you better. However, one issue recently mentioned again is more than enough.

Obama says he wants his healthcare plan to cover pre-existing conditions. Even if everything else he wants to do was a viable option – which it’s not – this one thing would cause so many problems it would totally disrupt the entire industry on its own. Aside from that, healthcare companies wouldn’t cover them on their own so it’d take a government takeover. This would trigger more problems than I could list if that happened.

However:

Getting coverage for pre-existing conditions sounds great. If you have some major sickness, you would want your carrier to pay for your care because they would have had to pay if you had coverage before you were diagnosed with your illness, right? Great idea….you may think…

Covering pre-existing conditions is an impossibility with insurance! Let me point out that health insurance companies will cover you for things you already have like high blood pressure or minor arthritis, maybe asthma, but not for something like cancer or diabetes, or any other major disease that can result in major treatment needs coming up. You will pay an additional rate if you have high blood pressure because you are a higher risk, just like people who have tickets or accidents in their driving history will pay more for car insurance.

Now you may say at this point, “Insurance companies are being greedy, they can’t do that. They can’t cover me for one thing and not for another.”

Let me give you an example with something you are probably more familiar with: your car insurance. Obviously, you know you have to have car insurance to have coverage when you have an accident. Say you don’t want to pay for the insurance (like 33% of drivers here in Oklahoma) so you don’t buy it. You are then involved in an accident where you are at fault. Just call up the insurance company and pay your first month, they’ll cover it, right? No, that would be called a pre-existing condition. You’ve already wrecked your car, they are not going to pay for that or the other person you hit. It just can’t happen. They would go out of business; it’s unethical to get a service for which you have not paid. You should have had insurance before you got in the accident.

Apply this same principle to health insurance. If you’re sick with something before you get insurance, they can’t give you new coverage. You should have already had health insurance. Even if you had to quit your job because of health, you have something called COBRA already available where you can keep your insurance for 18 months after you have quit working, regardless. Also, you can get in a state insurance pool that does not exclude anyone for anything.

No insurance company can reasonably cover pre-existing conditions. If the insurance company said they would do this, no one would get car insurance and then the rate all the good drivers would pay would be so astronomical it would be unaffordable, more than it already is. Insurance is about spreading risk. The insurance company has people (actuaries) who do lots of math all day and estimate out how many people are going to have accidents on average and they set premiums accordingly. People trying to get coverage for something that cannot be estimated would drive the industry into the ground. It’s not greedy to make money, it’s how business has to work. The insurance industry employees thousands of people and they have to earn a living just like every other industry. Did you know that Wal-Mart makes a profit? So does the movie theater, the restaurant….everyone does. They would go broke if they covered pre-existing conditions. No one would pay for insurance until they needed it. The companies would get stuck with major bills for major health conditions and would not be able to pay the claims of people who really paid for the service.

Insurance is designed as a transfer of risk system. You get it when you don’t need it to pay out when you do need it. You can’t buy life insurance when you just found out you have cancer and only 3 months to live. It doesn’t work that way. It goes back to welfare, wanting something for nothing. Society can’t function that way. Insurance definitely can’t function that way. They can’t pay for the guy who wasn’t responsible and didn’t take care of his insurance and let the guy who is responsible stuck with the bill.

Hope this makes sense. Bottom line, let competition rule the health insurance industry. Competition is what has driven this country forward and we are on the verge of letting it all go.

Don’t let that happen. Vote for freedom, vote to keep our Republic strong.

Homework for Tuesday

2008-10-29T10:10:00.000-07:00

We're voting on four state questions on Tuesday. Here is the text from the Oklahoma State Election Board, along with some small commentary by me.

http://www.ok.gov/~elections/sq_gen08.pdf

--------------------------------------------

Issue: Property tax exemption for disabled veterans
State Question 735
Legislative Referendum 343
Originating Legislation: HB 1808 (2007)
Principal Authors: Senator Mike Mazzei, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General)
This measure amends the Oklahoma Constitution. It adds Section 8D to Article 10. The measure takes effect January 1, 2009. It creates an exemption from personal property tax. The exemption would be for the full amount of taxes due on all household personal property. The exemption would apply to certain injured veterans. It would also apply to those veterans’ surviving spouses.

To qualify for the exemption an injured veteran would have to meet certain requirements. First, a branch of the Armed Forces or the Oklahoma National Guard would have to have honorably discharged the veteran from active service. Second, the veteran would have to be an Oklahoma resident. Third, the veteran would have to be the head of the household. Fourth, the veteran would have to be one hundred percent permanently disabled. Fifth, the United States Department of Veterans Affairs would have to certify the disability. Sixth, the disability must have occurred through military action or accident, or resulted from a disease contracted while in active service. The Legislature could pass laws to carry out the exemption. Such laws could not change the amount of the exemption.

Personally, I think Vets don't see nearly enough benefits, particularly disabled Vets. If someone is rendered unable to work as a result of them taking a bullet or a grenade to keep me and my family safe, I'll pick up the slack for their property tax. Vets already have difficulty seeing the full benefits they are already entitled by law. I have no problem adding this to the list in the hope that it relieves the sacrifices they and their families have made for their country. -------------------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Applications for property tax exemptions State Question 741
Legislative Referendum 344
Originating Legislation: HB 3354 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Jim Wilson, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General) This measure amends the Oklahoma Constitution. It would add a new Section 22A to Article 10. This section is related to exemptions from property taxes. It would require a person or business to file an application for an exemption. No exemption could be granted prior to filing an application. The Legislature may write laws to carry out the provisions of this section.

I see justification for this bill for two reasons. 1) Randy Terrill is listed as a co-author, and I trust his judgment. 2) There was recently unearthed by Rep. Mike Reynolds a list of people who received personal and business property tax exemptions from Gov. Henry, with no paper trail or regular justification. We need such paper trails to verify these exemptions are given justly, not as kickbacks or rewards. -------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Rights of hunting, trapping, fishing and taking game or fish State Question 742
Legislative Referendum 345
Originating Legislation: SJR 38 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Glenn Coffee, Representative Randy Terrill
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as approved by the Attorney General)
This measure adds a new section to the State Constitution. It adds Section 36 to Article 2. It gives all people of this state the right to hunt, trap, fish and take game and fish. Such activities would be subject to reasonable regulation. It allows the Wildlife Conservation Commission to approve methods and procedures for hunting, trapping, fishing and taking of game and fish. It allows for taking game and fish by traditional means. It makes hunting, fishing, and trapping the preferred means to manage certain game and fish. The new law will not affect existing laws relating to property rights.

This bill has been given the stamp of approval by the NRA, so it's probably alright. ----------------------------------------------------------------------

Issue: Sales of wine by winemakers State Question 743
Legislative Referendum 346
Originating Legislation: SJR 29 (2008)
Principal Authors: Senator Tom Ivester, Representative Danny Morgan
Election Date: November 4, 2008

Ballot Title (as re-written by the Attorney General)
This measure amends Section 3 of Article 28 of the Constitution. It requires a customer to be twenty-one and physically present to purchase wine at a winery, festival or trade show. The measure changes the law to allow certain winemakers to sell directly to retail package stores and restaurants in Oklahoma. The change applies to winemakers who produce up to ten thousand gallons of wine a year. It applies to winemakers in state and out of state. Those winemakers may not also use a licensed wholesale distributor. They must sell their wine to every retail package store and restaurant in Oklahoma that wants to buy the wine. The sales must be on the same price basis. The sales must be without discrimination. Those winemakers must use their own leased or owned vehicles to distribute their wine. They may not use common or private carriers. If any part of this measure is found to be unconstitutional, no winemaker could sell wine directly to retail package stores or restaurants in Oklahoma.

Honestly, I'm not sure what to make of this one. Winemakers who produce 10,000 gallons of wine a year can sell directly to retailers, but not to distributors? And there is a caveat "just in case" this measure is found to be unconstitutional? I'm all for free trade, but this seems to be a measure limiting certain regulation by imposing other regulation. I just don't know. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. --------------------------------------------------------------

Contact For More Information:

The Senate staff members listed below may be able to provide further information on the state questions listed in this legislative brief. However, the provisions of Section 16-119 of Title 26 of the Oklahoma Statutes prohibit state officials from directing or authorizing the expenditure of public funds to be used in support of or in opposition to measures being referred to the people for a vote, and provide misdemeanor penalties for offenses. In addition, rules of the Ethics Commission prohibit the use of public funds, property or time to influence the results of a ballot measure. Due to these restrictions, the information on state questions that the Senate staff is able to provide may be limited. Committees raising or expending funds in support of or in opposition to a state question are required to register with the Ethics Commission (www.ethics.ok.gov).

State Questions 735 and 741: Joanie Raff, Legislative Analyst Judy King, Staff Attorney

State Question 742: Jeri Trope, Legislative Analyst

State Question 743: Lexa Shafer, Legislative Analyst Selden Jones, Staff Attorney

Prepared By: The Oklahoma State Senate, Senate Staff Senator Mike Morgan, President Pro Tempore Senator Glenn Coffee, Co-President Pro Tempore

The Audacity of Audacity

2008-10-29T08:33:00.000-07:00

NEWSFLASH: Tonight, for the first time in American history, a presidential candidate be delivering a State of the Union address prior to the presidential election.

Barack Obama will be speaking tonight, taking over nearly all major network and cable news stations.

I suggest we all honor ABC's decision not to air the 30-minute Obamamercial and watch Pushing Daisies.

Or read. Or do laundry. Do anything else.

Updated: Blocked?

2008-10-28T12:32:00.000-07:00

So, this is odd.

I tried to share the link to this blog with a friend of mine on facebook via the new instant messaging tool they have.

It was blocked:

Because it's facebook, they can't tell me who reported it or why.

You know, not that we're adults or anything, but I would imagine that if you had a problem with something a person wrote - an independent blogger, not even a major news outlet - you might mention it to the blogger rather than just reporting the link to block others access to it.

In fairness, facebook has not blocked all access to this link from their site (yet). I'm just not allowed to share the link via messenger anymore.

Just odd.

Update:

Facebook has unblocked my link. No notice or explanation. maybe it was a fluke. Who knows. But it's cleared up now.

A Blessing in Disguise?

2008-10-28T11:28:00.000-07:00

Obama being elected President, while impalpable to anyone who reads the Constitution, is not the worst thing that could happen to us. Obama’s power will largely depend on the Congress he has to work with.

For weeks, we’ve been anticipating a Democrat surge in the Senate, envisioning a horror movie in which the ultra-liberal President Obama is allowed to ride roughshod over Truth, Justice and The American Way by the Democrat super-majority in the Congress.

But how likely is that scenario?

This is just a theory, and I may (God forbid) be completely wrong, but just bear me out.

Let’s not look at this from the perspective of the Presidential election. What hasn’t received much press is the battle for the House and Senate.

Perhaps, a few weeks ago, the horror movie seemed inevitable. Eight years of media-fueled Republican/Bush hatred drilled the image of a Blue Capitol into the minds of Americans.

Then, the Bailout Bill.

Since then, has there been more anger toward a Congress since the War Between the States? (The draft, maybe. And they’re the side that keeps suggesting bringing that back). Trillions of dollars have been lost on the Stock market. Homes values nation-wide have dropped 17%.

Even Saturday Night Live acknowledged that the Democrat Majority was responsible for the Bailout and for the irresponsibility that led to it, making Bush look like a pawn in the Democrats’ evil plan.

Subsequently, they had to pull and sanitize the skit. Gee, wonder why.

Is it possible that the Democrats are actually losing ground? We aren’t hearing much about Democrats retaining seats from the MSM. The Dreaded Murtha finally looks like he’s going to get the boot. Cindy Sheehan was running against Nancy Pelosi. Barney Frank has been exposed as a nutcase. (Or, as I like to call him, Future Cartman.)

And we have the Bailout Bill to thank for this.

Had we actually squashed the Bailout, none of this would have been exposed. The frustration toward the Democrat legislative branch would have been kept at a simmer rather than the raging boil it is now.

Again, this is all theoretical, and it may not affect Obama in the slightest.

But Jack Murtha is losing his seat. SNL spoke against Democrat leadership and got punished. People are noticing.

And it all comes back to the Bailout Bill.

Irony is a…

Vote Dana Murphy!

2008-10-28T08:03:00.000-07:00

We're voting for more than just a President next Tuesday. And the future of our country relies as much, if not more, on state and local elections than it does on the national ones.

This letter is written by Charlie Meadows, President of OCPAC, the premier Conservative PAC in Oklahoma.

Read and vote DANA MURPHY next Tuesday!!!!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Members and friends of the Oklahoma Conservative Political Action Committee (OCPAC)

I wanted to send out this special e-mail about the short term corporation commission race between Jim Roth and Dana Murphy. I am often asked if these e-mails can be forwarded? By all means please do, as I think most Oklahoman’s don’t know much about this race. Also, if this has been forwarded to you, and you would like to receive our e- mail on a weekly basis, just send me your name and e-mail address and I will add you to our list. Send to: charliemeadows@peoplepc.com.

I believe McCain and Inhofe will win in November with sizeable margins. Therefore the most contested statewide race this year will be the Corporation Commission race between Republican Dana Murphy and the Democrat incumbent Jim Roth. This is a special election as Roth was appointed to the position about a year and a half ago by Governor Henry.

There may be a small number of people who have been reading the Oklahoman closely and on a regular basis over the past 3 or 4 years who may know that Jim Roth is an out of the closet homosexual. However, most Oklahomans are unaware of his un-natural sexual perversion. I don’t believe he makes any mention of his homosexuality on his web-site nor has the liberal Tulsa World informed their readers about that information, though they have endorsed him.

In brief, the largest PAC in the nation supporting homosexual candidates considers this one the most important races in the nation (see www.victoryfund.org). In addition, Jim Roth’s Corporation Commission Campaign was a sponsor of the 2008 Gay Pride Parade held earlier this year in Oklahoma City (see www.okcpride.org). Then of course, when Roth was a County Commissioner in Oklahoma County, he supported having pro-homosexual books accessible to small children in the Oklahoma County libraries. Have you ever wondered why the homosexual community from all over America would contribute tens, perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars to Jim Roth’s corporation commission race in OKLAHOMA?

The hyper-tolerant, anything goes liberal crowd will say, all of that character stuff, integrity and sexual preference does not matter. To talk about it is only a diversion from the business at hand. The only thing they will suggest as important, is how well a person does their job. Therefore I want to examine the job performance of Roth as a corporation commissioner.

In one of his TV adds he portrays himself as a tough advocate of the people who stood up to those BIG UTILITIES and said NO to a two billion dollar rate increase. In his silliest commercial, he portrays himself as a penny pinching paperclip counter, a conservationist wanting to save money for the ratepayers. While it is true he voted against the rate increase request, it was actually1.8 billion not 2 billion dollars, he is most likely going to cause the ratepayers to pay far more for electricity in the future. An estimated $5 billion more for electricity over the 40 year life of the generation plant he voted against.

You see, he voted against building a high-tech clean burning coal fired generation plant, next to an existing clean burning coal fired plant. As the administrating judge at the corporation said, this expansion will save the ratepayers significant money over the many years to come.

Roth, will say it was too risky and the utilities shouldn’t be allowed to collect money for the plant before it is built. Again, this is not watching out for the ratepayers as the sooner the utilities could start collecting rates to pay for the plant, the less they would have to borrow and thus this would be less interest that rate payers would eventually have to pay. By the way, what is risky about a coal fired power plant? They have been used for a long time, and the new ones are much improved and much cleaner.

Three of the state’s utilities were going into an unusual partnership in building this expansion which would have saved the ratepayers $100 million dollars in construction costs alone rather than each of them having to build or buy separate facilities. It was estimated the utilities spent up to 50 million dollars in engineering and planning costs to get the project to a vote before the commission said no in a 2 to 1 vote. However, later on, Roth voted for a rate increase to allow the utilities to recover that cost.

Without the badly needed generation capacity, American Electric Power-PSO of Oklahoma was forced to ask for a rate increase to purchase 2 smaller natural gas generation plants. Roth voted for that rate increase. OG&E was forced to purchase a gas fired plant along with the GRDA, and Roth voted for that rate increase. Commissioner Bob Anthony, always the rate payer’s friend, refused to vote on that rate increase as a protest about the higher rates consumers were going to have pay for electricity in the future.

Then of course the popular thing to do today is to be in favor of wind generation as well as other renewable energy. So OG&E requested a huge rate increase to build wind farms in far Northwest Oklahoma and the transmission lines to get that electricity to the metropolitan areas or to be able to transmit that electricity to sell out of state.

Here is the dirty little secret about electricity generated from wind. When the turbines are moving they are producing cheaper electricity. Yet, all of the significant cost to those giant windmills and perhaps much of the cost for the transmission lines is a duplication or a doubling of the cost for infrastructure.

The reason is that wind is not a reliable source of electricity. On those brutally hot days of Summer, when there isn’t a whisper of a breeze and the demand for electricity is at peak load, we have to have enough TRADITIONAL generation capacity to provide the necessary electricity. These are high demand times when the wind produces little to nothing and we must pay twice for the generation capacity.

So the question must be asked, where has Jim Roth saved the consumers any money? I would suggest he has cost the ratepayers more and in the long run, much more. If that is the case, why would Mr. Slickster shaft the ratepayers as a commissioner then tell them he was watching out for them?

You might not have to go any further for that answer than to understand who it is, besides the homosexuals, that are supporting and funding his campaign. Raising huge sums of money for him are none other than multi-millionaires and billionaires such as Aubry McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy, George Kaiser of Kaiser Oil and the Bank of Oklahoma, as well as Clay Bennett, married into the Gaylord family and managing partner of the new OKC Thunder NBA basketball team.

McClendon has spent millions in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas fighting the construction of generation plants which would use coal and therefore not buy gas to make electricity. I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to suspect his reason to oppose the coal fueled plants would be to force the utilities to build or buy gas fired plants of which he will be most happy to sell them all the gas they need. I actually want them to sell a lot of gas, but to power autos with, and not to make electricity. That would actually help to make us become less dependent on foreign oil.

One of Mike McCarville’s blogs recently revealed that according to e-mails which were made public in the Seattle trial to move the NBA Sonics to OKC, Jim Roth hinted at the close alliance he shares with McClendon. In a 2007 letter which he subsequently wrote to the sports editor of the Seattle times he said, “From the beginning, Clay and Aubrey initiated a genuine kindness and friendship toward my partner and me. They have publicly and consistently supported me, even pushing back when right-wing attacks have occurred.”

It appears there is a close relationship between these powerful men and Roth, who certainly went to bat for them when the homosexual community in Seattle was attacking them while they were in the process of moving the team to Oklahoma.

Bottom line, I believe Roth is a puppet on a string for people that I believe want to control and use the regulatory power of government for their personal purposes. I also believe, if Roth wins, he will use this election as a launching pad to a future U.S. Senate race or perhaps Governor some day.

On the other hand, I believe Dana Murphy is honest, independent (can’t be bought), is supremely prepared as she has a degree in geology, law and was a hearing judge at the commission for several years. I also believe she wants to serve in this capacity with no intention to run for another office sometime in the future. I believe Dana will seek that delicate balance which is the best for the oil and gas industry and the consumers at the same time. That is the real job of a corporation commissioner. I urge folks to vote for Dana Murphy and support efficient and effective government for the benefit of all Oklahomans.

Charlie Meadows
charliemeadows@peoplepc.com

Intellectuals for McCain/Palin '08

2008-10-27T12:57:00.000-07:00

Laura Ingraham asked educated listeners on her radio show to thumb their noses at RINO elitists and join her youtube channel and show their support for McCain/Palin '08. This is a small sampling I collected.

The first video is Laura's.

The Heads Continue to Roll

2008-10-27T10:37:00.000-07:00

Let me just say, none of this would be happeneing without the efforts of State Rep. Mike Reynolds. He was and is the right man for the job.

This is why the North Side Elitists keep recruiting naive, inexperienced people (or, to put it more bluntly, useful idiots) to run against him. He won't play ball and help the elitist RINOs like Lance Cargill cover themselves in their collusion with corrupt officials.

Look for more heads in the future.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

MUSKOGEE — Corrupt businessman Steve Phipps, the linchpin of a three-year FBI investigation, told a federal grand jury he could implicate more than 30 people — including Democratic Senate leader Mike Morgan — in "criminal activities and/or political corruption,” a court document shows.

Steve Phipps. Photo provided

In addition to the people Phipps already has testified against at trial, the list also includes former state Agriculture Secretary Dennis Howard, former state Auditor and Inspector Clifton Scott, a southeast Oklahoma judge and the director of the state Water Resources Board.

Phipps’ willingness to talk and his ability, in many cases, to produce supporting documents explains why prosecutors offered him such an extraordinary deal: Although he admitted on the witness stand to committing 300-400 felonies, Phipps was charged with just one — conspiracy — and faces a term of no more than five years in prison.

Phipps testified at least three times to the grand jury and has met with FBI agents numerous times. He will be sentenced when his cooperation is finished.

His list became public during testimony last week at the federal trial of former state Rep. Randall Erwin.

Kickbacks alleged

Phipps testified that he paid kickbacks to Erwin, who steered $1.1 million in state taxpayer money to Phipps’ businesses. The jury began deliberating Erwin’s fate on Friday and will continue Monday.

The page shown to jurors didn’t say what information Phipps had or how he knew about "criminal activities and/or political corruption” by those on the list. Virtually all of the big names on his list are Democrats.

U.S. Attorney Sheldon Sperling declined comment about the document, as did Phipps’ attorney.

Those on the list whom Phipps previously implicated in open court include former state Auditor and Inspector Jeff McMahan and his wife, Lori; former state Reps. Mike Mass, Randall Erwin and Jerry Hefner; former state Sen. Gene Stipe; and Stipe’s younger brother Francis.

Mass and the McMahans await sentencing for their relationship with Phipps.

Francis Stipe died after pleading guilty in April to four felony counts. Gene Stipe’s trial on the same four counts is on hold pending a mental competency hearing. Hefner hasn’t been charged with any crimes.

How did list of potential targets become public information?

During cross-examination by Randall Erwin’s defense lawyer Tuesday, Steve Phipps was shown a written statement he provided to a federal grand jury on Feb. 16, 2007, the day after Phipps reached a plea agreement with prosecutors.

U.S. District Judge Ronald White allowed one page of the document to be displayed on a big screen for jurors as Phipps read from it. That page included names of 34 people about whom Phipps said he would provide information.

On Wednesday, the judge said he had erred in allowing the document to be entered into evidence. Phipps’ written statement no longer is an exhibit for Erwin’s trial record. However, the 34 names will become part of the trial transcript.

It’s unclear how much the grand jury has heard from Phipps about many of those people. Grand jury proceedings are secret.

Who is not on the list?

Absent from Steve Phipps’ list are some politicians who received illegal campaign contributions from him and former state Sen. Gene Stipe. Among them are Gov. Brad Henry and U.S. Rep. Dan Boren.

The reason: Phipps testified that some beneficiaries of his illegal contributions weren’t aware of the true source of the money. Henry and Boren have said they were unaware.

also see: http://static.newsok.biz/flash/stipe/stipe.html?KeepThis=true&TB_iframe=true&height=500&width=988

The Definition of Qualified

2008-10-24T19:16:00.000-07:00

What has become glaringly obvious in this election cycle is that no two people have the same idea as to what “qualified” means. People think Sarah Palin is qualified because of this or that, Obama is qualified because of other reasons, and it always ends in a deadlock.

We were actually given what the qualifications for President are by the Founding Fathers. There aren’t many; the reason, presumably, being that the Founding Fathers wanted as many citizens as possible to be eligible to run for office, thus avoiding an elitist ruling class who came out of the affluent or the inbred, like they were used to in Great Britain.

However, the qualifications they did list are very specific:

Article II, Section 1: No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

- Must be a natural-born citizen (or a citizen at the time of the Constitutional Convention, which pretty much rules out everyone alive today – yes, even McCain)
- Must be at least 35 years old
- Must have resided in the US for the last 14 years
That’s it. Those are the only legal qualifications for the President. Pretty simple, right? Pretty cut and dry?

Yet there is question in Barack Obama’s qualifications even under these few standards.

I don’t like conspiracy theories or the narcissistic attitudes they prop up, “I know something you don’t know.” So I didn’t pay much attention to this story when it first surfaced, because it seemed like a fringe rumor that would be quashed pretty quickly.

However, that is not what’s happened. Obama, among many other documents, has refused to produce his Birth Certificate for the lawsuit brought against him challenging his natural-born citizenship. We have to ask, why?

There was a time limit set for his response time. According to the law under which this lawsuit was filed, Obama had a certain period of time to respond by producing his birth certificate or some other document challenging the suit, or else be seen to admit guilt to the charge filed.

Therefore, in the eyes of the law, he has admitted guilt of the allegation alleged in the lawsuit –that he is not a natural-born American citizen.

The time limit for the production of these documents coincided with his trip to Hawaii to visit his grandmother. A trip during which he has banned all media access to his activities. Two weeks before the election. And in his absence, he handed the reigns of his campaign to Hillary Clinton, of all people. Again, why?

A man who has nothing to hide acts like it. Obama has failed to produce documents and then effectively went into hiding when the deadline approached.

This is probably the most important issue in this election. Why? Because if someone Constitutionally unqualified for office is elected to the Presidency, then voter fraud doesn’t really matter. Our Constitution becomes impotent.

Anticipated responses:

"Obama posted a birth certificate on his website."

"Factcheck.org posted a birth certificate."

"Under later amendments his citizenship is otherwise validated."

These are all addressed.

Watch this video, and then pass it along.

35 Miracles Happened Tuesday

2008-10-23T07:56:00.001-07:00

35 Babies Save on Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity

The Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity was a huge success yesterday with 35 babies saved that we know of and two girls coming to Christ. We know that it is because of all of you and your willingness to allow God to use you that this is possible. While we know about 35 babies saved, I am sure there are many more we don't know about.

I know that many of you faced persecution for standing up for the babies and God will bless you for your courage. What is important for you to remember is that you were not alone even if you felt like your were. Over 200,000 students were with you around the world in 25 countries take the same stand yesterday is solidarity.

I felt the best way to tell you about the day was to allow your words to speak about the event. Here are just a few testimonies I have received from yesterday, and there are hundreds more.

“I attend a Baptist college so I knew I wouldn't get much of a chance to spread the word so after my last class I went down to the mall and was there for about 20 minutes before a group of teenage girls walked up to me and asked what I was doing. I handed them a paper and one started to cry. I took off the tape and asked what was wrong. I found out that 2 of those girls had just set up an appointment for an abortion. We sat and talked for almost an hour; it was clear that God was at work. Not only did these girls cancel the appointment but I had the privilege to lead them to the Lord.”

"I'm speechless! I saved a baby today! Without even saying a word! Praise the Lord for His hand is upon us and our harvest shall be bountiful"

“ I was surprised as to how much I prayed; I have never prayed that much in school, ever. There were originally five people doing it this morning and by the end of the day it doubled. I was super happy. You never know how many people are affected by the things you do.”

“There was another woman considering abortion, so again I broke my silence and had a 15 minute tear-session/convo with her and she too opted for adoption! I'm so far beyond ecstatic and I am yet again radically affected by this!”

"Today was great!You could walk down the wall at school and see red tape everywhere. Very few people stayed silent it is hard not to talk for a day but having tape over your mouth helps. I had so many people come up and ask what the tape was about. I showed them my badge. I cant wait for next year. This day means a lot to me. I got pregnant when I was 15 and people told me I was ruining my life and I should just abort him. I didn't and I couldn't be happier. I've gotten my GED am In college and have gotten a job offer for when I grad. I'm proof that you can make it no matter your age and I want everyone to know."

"When I got back to class, I stayed silent- lunch was crazy, my white board got a lot of good use. I brought about 15 people who were wondering about what I was doing to one area and told them about it. After a heated debate with a fellow student, about 13 of them changed their views on abortion. Next year I'm going to hold a part-year club and it will be the most successful year of Silent-Day for me and for that school"

"I was brutally picked on today, but I don't care, I'll do it again next year. Children will live and that's what I care about! I broke my silence today for a girl, she not only opted for adoption but talked another girl into opting the same way!"

Like I said these are just a few of the amazing stories I have received so far and they keep pouring in.

We need your Pictures and Stories

We would love to have all the pictures you took during the Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity. Please go to www.silentday.org and upload them along with your stories. You can also e-mail the to iamsilent@standtrue.com. If you good high res pics we would love to have them for a calendar and poster we are going to make.

Support The Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity

Has the Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity been a blessing to you? Have you seen the amount of good that has come from this event over the past 5 years? Do you believe in this event and Stand True (the ministry that puts it on every year)?

If so, we would ask you to please consider helping to support this event with a donation. It takes a lot of time and money to make this amazing, pro-life, witnessing, opportunity happen. I know most of you are students and don't have a lot of money. Most of you will spend at least $5 on a value meal or some kind of fancy latte between now and the event. Would you consider skipping that meal or coffee to help the Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity?

Here are four ways to donate:

1) Send a PayPal donation to store@standtrue.com

2) Go to www.silentday.org and click on the donate button

3) Call the office at 937.339.5648 and make a credit card donation

4) Send a check to Stand True - PO Box 890 - Troy, OH 45373

For Christ I stand,

Bryan Kemper - bryankemper@standtrue.com

Founder - Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity