On Nov 1, 2007 I learned how low a church would stoop in order to force their beliefs on other people. Their practice of taunting dead soldiers at military funerals is one of the most despicable displays of human indecency ever visited upon another human.
After the family of the fallen soldier sued the church for invasion of privacy and intent to cause emotional distress a jury awarded the family a settlement and now constitutional lawyers have the audacity to proclaim that the church’s rights may have been violated.
This case is a matter of common decency over man-made laws involving ‘legal’ rights. The church has the ‘right’ to voice its opinions, as granted by the constitution, but civility and human decency dictates that families have the right to bury their members in peace and with dignity. Anyone, usurping this right should be deeply ashamed of themselves.
The funeral ceremony is one of the most sacred and solemn rites to be bestowed on a human and as such demands privacy and is therefore free from outside sources using it as a forum for their own agendas.
When that outside source is a church then they need to take a serious re-evaluation of what ‘service’ they are providing mankind.
Constitutional law ‘experts’ may determine this a violation of the church’s First Amendment rights of free speech, but when one right tramples on another then civility needs to win out. It is abhorrent that anyone would disrupt a funeral. Especially a church who is in the business of these matters. Any church that disrupts funeral proceedings is not a true representative of Gods will.
David Hudson of the First Amendment Center claims that "If people can be sued because people are offended by other people's speech, then we've really curtailed freedom of speech." You miss the point entirely Mr. Hudson. Civility dictates that a family has the right to bury family members without being accosted by anyone. This is the biggest problem with lawyers, they throw civility out the window when it comes to ‘protecting’ civil rights. To lawyers it is only a matter of the financial bottom-line as to what they ‘believe’ at the time.
They will struggle for victory no matter where the results take us, even at the cost of civility and human decency. There is a line that no one should be able to cross and that line is indelibly drawn around funerals.
You can quote all the lawmakers theories you want, Mr. Hudson, but anyone who intrudes on the sacred and solemn proceedings of a family burying their loved ones should rot in hell. When a so-called Christian group who masquerades under the banner of spreading Gods word is the driving force behind the intrusion, well, there should be a special place in hell for them.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Friday, November 23, 2007
School of the Americas
Bill Quigley of TruthOut.org recently ran an article in AlterNet reporting how an annual gathering for peace and human rights was staged at Fort Benning, Georgia in an attempt to shutdown the School of the AmericasT.
The annual event drew more than 20,000 activists gathered at Fort Benning while simultaneous protests occurred in Santiago Chile, Tucson Arizona, Toronto Canada, and Berkeley California.
I direct the readers attention to this article for the purpose of illuminating how our government callously disregards human rights whenever someone protests what the government is doing.
The article, entitled ‘Twenty thousand protest at Fort Benning: Eleven face federal criminal trials” can be found here.
The annual event drew more than 20,000 activists gathered at Fort Benning while simultaneous protests occurred in Santiago Chile, Tucson Arizona, Toronto Canada, and Berkeley California.
I direct the readers attention to this article for the purpose of illuminating how our government callously disregards human rights whenever someone protests what the government is doing.
The article, entitled ‘Twenty thousand protest at Fort Benning: Eleven face federal criminal trials” can be found here.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Cost of Cheap Labor
I received this email and there is no author (it had been forwarded three times before it got to me) but it sounds very much in tune with reality.
Subject: Beware of Cheap Tomatoes
Tomatoes and Cheap Labor
Cheap Tomatoes; This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent
From a California school teacher - - - "As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.
Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud.
The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones.
The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less than 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" (whores) and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.
Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements?
To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.
Higher insurance, medical facilities closing, higher medical costs, more crime, lower standards of education in our schools, overcrowding, new diseases etc., etc, etc. For me, I'll pay more for tomatoes.
We need to wake up. The guest worker program will be a disaster because we won't have the guts to enforce it. Does anyone in their right mind really think they will voluntarily leave and return?
There are many hardworking Hispanic/American citizens that contribute to our country and many that I consider my true friends. We should encourage and accept those Hispanics who have done it the right and legal way.
It does, however, have everything to do with culture: A third-world culture that does not value education, that accepts children getting pregnant and dropping out of school by 15 and that refuses to assimilate, and an American culture that has become so weak and worried about "politically correct" that we don't have the will to do anything about it. If this makes your blood boil, as it did mine, forward this to everyone you know.
CHEAP LABOR? Isn't that what the whole immigration issue is about?
Business doesn't want to pay a decent wage.
Consumers don't want expensive produce.
Government will tell you Americans don't want the jobs.
But the bottom line is cheap labor. The phrase "cheap labor" is a myth, a farce, and a lie. There is no such thing as "cheap labor."
Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or $6.00/ hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return,he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200 free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and books.
He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI. Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/ hour left after paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people. THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR EITHER PARTY. AND WHEN THEY LIE TO US AND DON'T DO AS THEY SAY, WE SHOULD REPLACE THEM AT ONCE!'
THIS HAS GOT TO BE PASSED ALONG TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.
Subject: Beware of Cheap Tomatoes
Tomatoes and Cheap Labor
Cheap Tomatoes; This should make everyone think, be you Democrat, Republican or Independent
From a California school teacher - - - "As you listen to the news about the student protests over illegal immigration, there are some things that you should be aware of:
I am in charge of the English-as-a-second-language department at a large southern California high school which is designated a Title 1 school, meaning that its students average lower socioeconomic and income levels.
Most of the schools you are hearing about, South Gate High, Bell Gardens, Huntington Park, etc., where these students are protesting, are also Title1 schools.
Title 1 schools are on the free breakfast and free lunch program. When I say free breakfast, I'm not talking a glass of milk and roll -- but a full breakfast and cereal bar with fruits and juices that would make a Marriott proud.
The waste of this food is monumental, with trays and trays of it being dumped in the trash uneaten. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I estimate that well over 50% of these students are obese or at least moderately overweight. About 75% or more DO have cell phones.
The school also provides day care centers for the unwed teenage pregnant girls (some as young as 13) so they can attend class without the inconvenience of having to arrange for babysitters or having family watch their kids. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I was ordered to spend $700,000 on my department or risk losing funding for the upcoming year even though there was little need for anything; my budget was already substantial. I ended up buying new computers for the computer learning center, half of which, one month later, have been carved with graffiti by the appreciative students who obviously feel humbled and grateful to have a free education in America. (OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK)
I have had to intervene several times for young and substitute teachers whose classes consist of many illegal immigrant students here in the country less than 3 months who raised so much hell with the female teachers, calling them "Putas" (whores) and throwing things that the teachers were in tears.
Free medical, free education, free food, day care etc., etc., etc. Is it any wonder they feel entitled to not only be in this country but to demand rights, privileges and entitlements?
To those who want to point out how much these illegal immigrants contribute to our society because they LIKE their gardener and housekeeper and they like to pay less for tomatoes: spend some time in the real world of illegal immigration and see the TRUE costs.
Higher insurance, medical facilities closing, higher medical costs, more crime, lower standards of education in our schools, overcrowding, new diseases etc., etc, etc. For me, I'll pay more for tomatoes.
We need to wake up. The guest worker program will be a disaster because we won't have the guts to enforce it. Does anyone in their right mind really think they will voluntarily leave and return?
There are many hardworking Hispanic/American citizens that contribute to our country and many that I consider my true friends. We should encourage and accept those Hispanics who have done it the right and legal way.
It does, however, have everything to do with culture: A third-world culture that does not value education, that accepts children getting pregnant and dropping out of school by 15 and that refuses to assimilate, and an American culture that has become so weak and worried about "politically correct" that we don't have the will to do anything about it. If this makes your blood boil, as it did mine, forward this to everyone you know.
CHEAP LABOR? Isn't that what the whole immigration issue is about?
Business doesn't want to pay a decent wage.
Consumers don't want expensive produce.
Government will tell you Americans don't want the jobs.
But the bottom line is cheap labor. The phrase "cheap labor" is a myth, a farce, and a lie. There is no such thing as "cheap labor."
Take, for example, an illegal alien with a wife and five children. He takes a job for $5.00 or $6.00/ hour. At that wage, with six dependents, he pays no income tax, yet at the end of the year, if he files an Income Tax Return,he gets an "earned income credit" of up to $3,200 free.
He qualifies for Section 8 housing and subsidized rent.
He qualifies for food stamps.
He qualifies for free (no deductible, no co-pay) health care.
His children get free breakfasts and lunches at school.
He requires bilingual teachers and books.
He qualifies for relief from high energy bills.
If they are or become, aged, blind or disabled, they qualify for SSI. Once qualified for SSI they can qualify for Medicare. All of this is at (our) taxpayer's expense.
He doesn't worry about car insurance, life insurance, or homeowners insurance.
Taxpayers provide Spanish language signs, bulletins and printed material.
He and his family receive the equivalent of $20.00 to $30.00/hour in benefits.
Working Americans are lucky to have $5.00 or $6.00/ hour left after paying their bills and his.
The American taxpayers also pay for increased crime, graffiti and trash clean-up.
Cheap labor? YEAH RIGHT! Wake up people. THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS WE SHOULD BE ADDRESSING TO THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES FOR EITHER PARTY. AND WHEN THEY LIE TO US AND DON'T DO AS THEY SAY, WE SHOULD REPLACE THEM AT ONCE!'
THIS HAS GOT TO BE PASSED ALONG TO AS MANY AS POSSIBLE.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Musharraf and Bush: puppets and war profiteers
Musharraf would go for the U.S. brand of democracy if he would only understand what it means for all politicians. Politicians could tax the hell out of the working force to pay for their rich lifestyle, their parties, their opportunities for ‘money under the table’ in backrooms where deals are made to pass bills and laws that help make themselves and their buddies richer. To pay for their own retirement benefits and their own health insurance while not having to share anything with the very people who put them in power. But Musharraf doesn't want to share with all politicians. He wants to ensure that only he and his buddies get to ride the gravy train and since he is in a position to prevent all opposition to his rule and is acting on that position to his benefit, this has made him George W. Bush’s hero.
This is why King George refuses to stop supporting the little dictator, they are brothers. Bush is simply spreading the wealth garnered from his illegal, propaganda-inflamed ‘war-against-terrorism’ scheme. If Bush allows Musharraf to be put out of office then all of Bush’s oil company buddies and his war machine cronies would take a direct hit in their fiscal bottom line. In Bush’s world of ‘steal from the poor and give to the rich’ such a mistake would be devastating. His ego would not be able to withstand such a let down to his club brothers.
Musharraf is dispensable if democracy is what Bush truly wants in Pakistan. In fact, it is necessary that Musharraf be relieved of power as soon as possible if democracy stands a chance of taking hold in Pakistan. Bush’s actions clearly show that democracy is not what Bush is after here. Bhutto wants democracy. Musharraf has clearly shown he only wants democracy if democracy wants him. Bush and Musharraf are too much alike to allow Musharraf to remain in power. He will destroy Pakistan just as Bush is destroying the U.S.
Wake up America, Musharraf still has ties with the Taliban. The Taliban propped him up as leader of Pakistan and he faked allegiance with America in order to slow America’s war against the Taliban. When Musharraf signed a peace deal with Islamic militants while claiming to fight alongside America to ferret out all militants proves he is just a scared puppy dog trying to hang on to power by promising to follow everybody’s direction. Now that he is faced with not being in power he arrests all lawmakers in an attempt to keep himself in power. This makes Musharraf a very untrustworthy and therefore very dangerous man.
Musharraf and Bush have both made it clear that democracy can take a back seat so they can stay in power and continue to profit from this illegal, immoral war at the expense of innocent lives.
This is why King George refuses to stop supporting the little dictator, they are brothers. Bush is simply spreading the wealth garnered from his illegal, propaganda-inflamed ‘war-against-terrorism’ scheme. If Bush allows Musharraf to be put out of office then all of Bush’s oil company buddies and his war machine cronies would take a direct hit in their fiscal bottom line. In Bush’s world of ‘steal from the poor and give to the rich’ such a mistake would be devastating. His ego would not be able to withstand such a let down to his club brothers.
Musharraf is dispensable if democracy is what Bush truly wants in Pakistan. In fact, it is necessary that Musharraf be relieved of power as soon as possible if democracy stands a chance of taking hold in Pakistan. Bush’s actions clearly show that democracy is not what Bush is after here. Bhutto wants democracy. Musharraf has clearly shown he only wants democracy if democracy wants him. Bush and Musharraf are too much alike to allow Musharraf to remain in power. He will destroy Pakistan just as Bush is destroying the U.S.
Wake up America, Musharraf still has ties with the Taliban. The Taliban propped him up as leader of Pakistan and he faked allegiance with America in order to slow America’s war against the Taliban. When Musharraf signed a peace deal with Islamic militants while claiming to fight alongside America to ferret out all militants proves he is just a scared puppy dog trying to hang on to power by promising to follow everybody’s direction. Now that he is faced with not being in power he arrests all lawmakers in an attempt to keep himself in power. This makes Musharraf a very untrustworthy and therefore very dangerous man.
Musharraf and Bush have both made it clear that democracy can take a back seat so they can stay in power and continue to profit from this illegal, immoral war at the expense of innocent lives.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Drivers failed test
Driving on our roadways is a responsibility that involves every driver and pedestrian in your vicinity. You have their safety in your hands while behind the wheel of that automobile. Driving laws are in place so that everyone around you has a chance of arriving at their destination safely. This ‘privilege’ is being taken for granted and far too many people don’t take it seriously enough.
GMAC insurance conducted an informal driving test and found that nearly 36 million of us failed the simple driving test. The two areas with the biggest deficiency are tailgating and traffic lights.
When approaching a yellow traffic signal slow down and stop, don’t speed up to get through it. How much time do you think you are saving getting through that light? Truly, you do not save more than a few seconds. And where are you going that a few seconds makes a difference? Take a relaxed attitude when driving, don’t be aggressive.
Tailgating. This action is just plain foolish. Traveling too close to the vehicle in front of you creates a situation in which you are likely to cause an accident. You are taking the drivers attention off of the road in front of them and forcing them to look back at you for the fool you are. If the car in front of them has to stop quickly making them stop quickly which in turn makes you stop quickly then you are about to be involved in their accident. Why put yourself in that situation? I have never understood the mentality of tailgating another vehicle. Do you really think you're going to make them go faster? Do you think it is wise to piss someone off who could slam on their brakes to get you to back off? If someone wants to drive the speed limit you have no place trying to get them to do otherwise. Again, don’t be aggressive on the road.
A third problem, that I personally see a lot of, is improper use of turn signals. How much effort does it take to inform other people of your intentions? Why do you insist on keeping it a secret?
Using your turn signal, be it to turn or to change lanes, is to inform others of your intention. Use of a turn signal actually helps you the driver making the turn by telling others to back off because you are going to slow down. Signaling does not, by any means, tell everyone around you to stop what they are doing just so you can do what you want. Turn signals should be used before you apply your brakes and before you actually change lanes. Putting on a turn signal after you are already in the turn lane or have already changed lanes is a bit late to do any good. Give people around you plenty of warning. Also, using turn signals tells others that they should go around you so they can continue on their way without having to slow down and then speed up again which wastes fuel.
The biggest dangers in driving, both of which is under our control, is that people become mindless behind the wheel or they get impatient and become aggressive. They either follow along too closely convinced nothing is will ever happen to them, or they think they have to pass everything on the road as if they are out to win some prize for getting somewhere first.
I blame the socially accepted norm of driving fast on car commercials, along with several other factors. If you watch car commercials with a critical eye to how they present their automobiles you will notice they are selling them to go faster than anyone around them. Car advertisers want potential buyers to think they are the flashiest thing on the road and car advertisers think they have to show the car going fast in order to pull this off. Why is this?
There is also this idea that the number one lane on the freeway, the far left lane, is considered the fast lane. People, there is no fast lane, all lanes are governed by the same speed limit. I see people riding in this number one lane at the speed limit when some joker will come up on them driving over the limit and expect everyone to get out of their way. The joker begins terrorizing the law-abiding driver by riding on their bumper because the joker thinks he/she has the right to force the law-abiding driver over out of ‘their’ lane. At freeway speeds this is just nuts. At any speed it is aggressive driving. This is noting more than a power trip and we need to fight that urge because some innocent is going to get hurt.
We need to realize that everyone around us wants to get to where they are going without feeling pressured by some joker harassing us by tailgating (which amounts to terrorizing).
It is easy to get lazy and forget about defensive driving and driver courtesy as safety mechanisms for everyone around us and this informal test proves it. Please, take the time to take the test for yourself and make a conscious effort to become a safer driver for everyone’s benefit. Think about how insurance rates would go down if there were no traffic accidents. It is the responsibility of each of us to make that happen.
GMAC insurance conducted an informal driving test and found that nearly 36 million of us failed the simple driving test. The two areas with the biggest deficiency are tailgating and traffic lights.
When approaching a yellow traffic signal slow down and stop, don’t speed up to get through it. How much time do you think you are saving getting through that light? Truly, you do not save more than a few seconds. And where are you going that a few seconds makes a difference? Take a relaxed attitude when driving, don’t be aggressive.
Tailgating. This action is just plain foolish. Traveling too close to the vehicle in front of you creates a situation in which you are likely to cause an accident. You are taking the drivers attention off of the road in front of them and forcing them to look back at you for the fool you are. If the car in front of them has to stop quickly making them stop quickly which in turn makes you stop quickly then you are about to be involved in their accident. Why put yourself in that situation? I have never understood the mentality of tailgating another vehicle. Do you really think you're going to make them go faster? Do you think it is wise to piss someone off who could slam on their brakes to get you to back off? If someone wants to drive the speed limit you have no place trying to get them to do otherwise. Again, don’t be aggressive on the road.
A third problem, that I personally see a lot of, is improper use of turn signals. How much effort does it take to inform other people of your intentions? Why do you insist on keeping it a secret?
Using your turn signal, be it to turn or to change lanes, is to inform others of your intention. Use of a turn signal actually helps you the driver making the turn by telling others to back off because you are going to slow down. Signaling does not, by any means, tell everyone around you to stop what they are doing just so you can do what you want. Turn signals should be used before you apply your brakes and before you actually change lanes. Putting on a turn signal after you are already in the turn lane or have already changed lanes is a bit late to do any good. Give people around you plenty of warning. Also, using turn signals tells others that they should go around you so they can continue on their way without having to slow down and then speed up again which wastes fuel.
The biggest dangers in driving, both of which is under our control, is that people become mindless behind the wheel or they get impatient and become aggressive. They either follow along too closely convinced nothing is will ever happen to them, or they think they have to pass everything on the road as if they are out to win some prize for getting somewhere first.
I blame the socially accepted norm of driving fast on car commercials, along with several other factors. If you watch car commercials with a critical eye to how they present their automobiles you will notice they are selling them to go faster than anyone around them. Car advertisers want potential buyers to think they are the flashiest thing on the road and car advertisers think they have to show the car going fast in order to pull this off. Why is this?
There is also this idea that the number one lane on the freeway, the far left lane, is considered the fast lane. People, there is no fast lane, all lanes are governed by the same speed limit. I see people riding in this number one lane at the speed limit when some joker will come up on them driving over the limit and expect everyone to get out of their way. The joker begins terrorizing the law-abiding driver by riding on their bumper because the joker thinks he/she has the right to force the law-abiding driver over out of ‘their’ lane. At freeway speeds this is just nuts. At any speed it is aggressive driving. This is noting more than a power trip and we need to fight that urge because some innocent is going to get hurt.
We need to realize that everyone around us wants to get to where they are going without feeling pressured by some joker harassing us by tailgating (which amounts to terrorizing).
It is easy to get lazy and forget about defensive driving and driver courtesy as safety mechanisms for everyone around us and this informal test proves it. Please, take the time to take the test for yourself and make a conscious effort to become a safer driver for everyone’s benefit. Think about how insurance rates would go down if there were no traffic accidents. It is the responsibility of each of us to make that happen.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
No more HO HO HO?
This is going too damn far! Can this really be what we have come to? Santas in Sydney Australia who showed up at a recruitment office are told not to use Father Christmas’s traditional “ho ho ho” greeting because it may be offensive to women! The only minds that would mistake this traditional greeting as offensive are sick immature twists who refuse to outgrow their juvenile ways.
This is Santa’s domain. If we begin changing our traditions because a few adults can’t grow up enough to prevent street slang from invading this joyous tradition then we have lost our joy. Have we become so fearful of offending that traditions are to be cast off?
We cannot give in to the sick minds of adults who refuse to grow up!
You are allowing these juvenile imbeciles to dictate how we view the world and in the process you are making yourself look foolish. Changing the way Santa greets children is offensive to this time honored tradition. You should be ashamed of yourselves for allowing your mind to compare this greeting with street slang.
Leave Santa alone!
This is Santa’s domain. If we begin changing our traditions because a few adults can’t grow up enough to prevent street slang from invading this joyous tradition then we have lost our joy. Have we become so fearful of offending that traditions are to be cast off?
We cannot give in to the sick minds of adults who refuse to grow up!
You are allowing these juvenile imbeciles to dictate how we view the world and in the process you are making yourself look foolish. Changing the way Santa greets children is offensive to this time honored tradition. You should be ashamed of yourselves for allowing your mind to compare this greeting with street slang.
Leave Santa alone!
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Indiana fights DUI
The court system in Indiana is trying something different in handling drunk drivers. DUI offenders are required to attend a court-mandated panel presentation at the Indiana State Fairgrounds.
At this particular presentation the offenders heard a panel member tell of how her brother was killed by a DUI driver. Her story is all too familiar, lamenting the loss of her loved one and how he will never do this or do that and how the offender spent a token amount of time in jail and is now free to go wherever he/she wants.
I applaud them for their effort to find the elusive method of preventing future tragedy. This is definitely a step in the right direction but it still is not enough. We cannot settle for reaching a small percentage of offenders who still have enough common decency to not repeat their offense against the unsuspecting innocents on our roads.
This reporter did not mention whether this was a one time panel or something that every DUI offender will have to go through. Maybe there are additional aspects of this program that goes further towards preventing future tragedy than what was reported in this article, I don’t know because the reporter did not go into any specifics. If this is all there is to this program then it is falls short.
Six people who were ordered to attend this panel showed up intoxicated. The reporter did not mention how these people arrived at the meeting. Did they drive themselves? Did someone bring them? Did any of these offenders loose their privilege to drive as a result of their arrest? Did anyone ignore this opportunity and just not show up?
The six people who showed up intoxicated clearly don’t get it. Something more needs to be done to keep them off of our streets. And reporters need to paint a much clearer picture about what is being done.
At this particular presentation the offenders heard a panel member tell of how her brother was killed by a DUI driver. Her story is all too familiar, lamenting the loss of her loved one and how he will never do this or do that and how the offender spent a token amount of time in jail and is now free to go wherever he/she wants.
I applaud them for their effort to find the elusive method of preventing future tragedy. This is definitely a step in the right direction but it still is not enough. We cannot settle for reaching a small percentage of offenders who still have enough common decency to not repeat their offense against the unsuspecting innocents on our roads.
This reporter did not mention whether this was a one time panel or something that every DUI offender will have to go through. Maybe there are additional aspects of this program that goes further towards preventing future tragedy than what was reported in this article, I don’t know because the reporter did not go into any specifics. If this is all there is to this program then it is falls short.
Six people who were ordered to attend this panel showed up intoxicated. The reporter did not mention how these people arrived at the meeting. Did they drive themselves? Did someone bring them? Did any of these offenders loose their privilege to drive as a result of their arrest? Did anyone ignore this opportunity and just not show up?
The six people who showed up intoxicated clearly don’t get it. Something more needs to be done to keep them off of our streets. And reporters need to paint a much clearer picture about what is being done.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Robert A. Singer-child pornographer
Here is another depraved adult who needs to learn how to live amongst civil society.
Mr. Singer, 49, was the chief operating officer at the National Children’s Museum in Washington D.C.
This scum bag was caught distributing child pornography over the internet from his employers computer.
He had the audacity to bring his vile tools of his depraved sick mind to his place of employment and sully the reputation of an institution that brings education and culture to children.
Does this indicate that there might be others at the National Children’s Museum that sympathize with his sick proclivity to children?
The Washington museum posted a message on its Web site saying officials there are "horrified" by news of Singer's arrest. They reported that he has been suspended from his post, effective immediately, and is barred from the property.
Singer, 49, was arrested at his home in Falls Church, Virginia, by federal agents, according to the prosecutors' statement. Authorities allege he engaged in several instant messaging "chats" and e-mail communications with the undercover detective, posing as the woman and her daughter, from August to September.
If I had a picture I would surely post it here so the world knows what depravity looks like.
Mr. Singer, 49, was the chief operating officer at the National Children’s Museum in Washington D.C.
This scum bag was caught distributing child pornography over the internet from his employers computer.
He had the audacity to bring his vile tools of his depraved sick mind to his place of employment and sully the reputation of an institution that brings education and culture to children.
Does this indicate that there might be others at the National Children’s Museum that sympathize with his sick proclivity to children?
The Washington museum posted a message on its Web site saying officials there are "horrified" by news of Singer's arrest. They reported that he has been suspended from his post, effective immediately, and is barred from the property.
Singer, 49, was arrested at his home in Falls Church, Virginia, by federal agents, according to the prosecutors' statement. Authorities allege he engaged in several instant messaging "chats" and e-mail communications with the undercover detective, posing as the woman and her daughter, from August to September.
If I had a picture I would surely post it here so the world knows what depravity looks like.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Border Patrol found lacking
In my on-going series of highlighting any instance where people are not doing their jobs this one is extremely problematic. Border Patrol officials have been found to be complacent and inattentive in their duties by undercover investigators. Weak management controls have also been found. Border Patrol is our first line of defense for the security of every U.S. citizen both physically and financially.
As with most jobs in law enforcement, Border Patrol is one of the toughest, and it is, like every law enforcement branch, under-manned. This is nothing new. Everyone claims they want law and order but there just are not enough people willing to put their lives on the line to enforce it.
Government watchdogs have found that thousands of people who shouldn't have been admitted to the United States were allowed in last year because of security lapses at legal border crossings. Granted, not everyone who comes in is a danger to our physical well-being and they certainly are not all terrorists. But some of these individuals are connected with criminal enterprises which is where our financial well-being is threatened most and why the lack of job performance on the part of the Border Patrol is most egregious to the safety of their fellow Americans.
GAO investigators arriving at one point of entry found no border agents in the inspection booth, while at other locations, agents didn't ask for travel documents, according to the report. I, myself, have driven through Otay point of entry and found no border agents in the booth while re-entering the U.S.
The number of inadmissible aliens who managed to enter through official ports of entry in 2006 has not been disclosed by the Government Accountability Office. However, a source who has seen a full version of the report, in which those statistics were included, put the total at 21,000.
The government, for obvious reasons, does not want to release the numbers of how many escaped the attention of Customs and Border Protection. One reason is there is no way to know the actual number so any number they come up with would have to be prefaced as being an estimate. Another reason they don’t release the numbers is they don’t want the taxpayer, who is paying their salaries, to know they are not performing their duty. They don’t want the very people they are supposed to protect to know they are not performing their duty.
Men and women of law enforcement are a special breed of people. They want to see the bad guy put away, as all of us law abiding citizens do, but they alone are willing to strap on a gun and a badge and put their own lives at stake to put those bad guys away. Those of us who sit back in our easy chairs from the comfort of our homes should be shamed for ever casting a bad light on those who are doing their best. I applaud those individuals and give to them my utmost deepest felt respect. It’s the individuals who have sworn to protect the laws and citizens of this great country and turn their backs on us by slacking in their job performance that should be reprimanded to the fullest extent of the law. To allow possible criminals to get into the U.S. because they did not do their jobs is criminal itself.
Those who are conscientiously doing their sworn duty can get very frustrated when they see criminals they have caught and then released by liberal judges or asshole lawyers who defends the criminal and convinces the judge to let the criminal go.
I can understand the frustration that Border Patrol agents feel after two of their own were arrested and put in jail for shooting a known drug smuggler. But that is no excuse for jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.
The Customs and Border Protection's stance is that at busy border crossings, it has to balance security with commerce. This is blatantly putting commerce ahead of safety.
The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 17,600 Customs and Border Protection officers manning ports of entry, said the agency is understaffed and poorly managed and officers are overworked and not adequately trained. Why can’t we put National Guard to help them? Since Bush can send them to Iraq in the name of keeping terrorists from coming to America then he can certainly send them to our borders in America.
Whether we think the threat is real or not, we cannot afford to assume the threat is not real and slack off on our duties. The U.S. taxpayer deserves to get our monies worth when agents are hired to protect us.
As with most jobs in law enforcement, Border Patrol is one of the toughest, and it is, like every law enforcement branch, under-manned. This is nothing new. Everyone claims they want law and order but there just are not enough people willing to put their lives on the line to enforce it.
Government watchdogs have found that thousands of people who shouldn't have been admitted to the United States were allowed in last year because of security lapses at legal border crossings. Granted, not everyone who comes in is a danger to our physical well-being and they certainly are not all terrorists. But some of these individuals are connected with criminal enterprises which is where our financial well-being is threatened most and why the lack of job performance on the part of the Border Patrol is most egregious to the safety of their fellow Americans.
GAO investigators arriving at one point of entry found no border agents in the inspection booth, while at other locations, agents didn't ask for travel documents, according to the report. I, myself, have driven through Otay point of entry and found no border agents in the booth while re-entering the U.S.
The number of inadmissible aliens who managed to enter through official ports of entry in 2006 has not been disclosed by the Government Accountability Office. However, a source who has seen a full version of the report, in which those statistics were included, put the total at 21,000.
The government, for obvious reasons, does not want to release the numbers of how many escaped the attention of Customs and Border Protection. One reason is there is no way to know the actual number so any number they come up with would have to be prefaced as being an estimate. Another reason they don’t release the numbers is they don’t want the taxpayer, who is paying their salaries, to know they are not performing their duty. They don’t want the very people they are supposed to protect to know they are not performing their duty.
Men and women of law enforcement are a special breed of people. They want to see the bad guy put away, as all of us law abiding citizens do, but they alone are willing to strap on a gun and a badge and put their own lives at stake to put those bad guys away. Those of us who sit back in our easy chairs from the comfort of our homes should be shamed for ever casting a bad light on those who are doing their best. I applaud those individuals and give to them my utmost deepest felt respect. It’s the individuals who have sworn to protect the laws and citizens of this great country and turn their backs on us by slacking in their job performance that should be reprimanded to the fullest extent of the law. To allow possible criminals to get into the U.S. because they did not do their jobs is criminal itself.
Those who are conscientiously doing their sworn duty can get very frustrated when they see criminals they have caught and then released by liberal judges or asshole lawyers who defends the criminal and convinces the judge to let the criminal go.
I can understand the frustration that Border Patrol agents feel after two of their own were arrested and put in jail for shooting a known drug smuggler. But that is no excuse for jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.
The Customs and Border Protection's stance is that at busy border crossings, it has to balance security with commerce. This is blatantly putting commerce ahead of safety.
The National Treasury Employees Union, which represents 17,600 Customs and Border Protection officers manning ports of entry, said the agency is understaffed and poorly managed and officers are overworked and not adequately trained. Why can’t we put National Guard to help them? Since Bush can send them to Iraq in the name of keeping terrorists from coming to America then he can certainly send them to our borders in America.
Whether we think the threat is real or not, we cannot afford to assume the threat is not real and slack off on our duties. The U.S. taxpayer deserves to get our monies worth when agents are hired to protect us.
Monday, November 5, 2007
The president who cried wolf!
Here we go again. Stop the world presses! George W. Bush claims that the very security of the U.S. depends on another one of his ‘yes men’ being nominated to high office. Enough of this crap George! Judge Mukasey is no more ‘crucial’ to the security of this country than I am. I at least know that waterboarding is torture and am not afraid to say so. And the fact that you call him a good man raises nothing but serious doubt on whether we can trust him.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Bush continually over-uses national security to bully his way into getting what he wants. I can’t wait for this petulant old man to be booted out of office at the next presidential election. It is my intense desire to see this little man and his embarrassing cohorts put out of office before that if Congress would only scrape together enough guts and integrity to do so.
Please spare us from having to listen to this delusional chicken little spouting off his paranoid crap about how the world will fall apart if we don’t accept his nominee or if his intelligence legislation isn’t passed or if we don’t throw more wasted billions of dollars at his dirty little illegal war.
Bush has the audacity to say that “Congress should not go home for the holidays while our men and women in uniform are waiting the funds they need.” This coming from a man who has taken more time off from his duties than any other president in U.S. history.
I pray to God that the next president knows how to righteously use diplomacy with the rest of world so that we don’t have to suffer the indignities of being viewed as thinking we are better than everyone else. This man knows nothing of how to get along with the world except through use of threat. I am embarrassed, as an American citizen, every day he and Cheney remains in the White House.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Who is looking after us?
Government agencies still taking thinly veiled bribes from the industries they are tasked to regulate.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Are these people naïve or unethical? The Consumer Product Safety Commission chief and her predecessor, under the Bush administration, have taken dozens of trips at the expense of the toy, appliance and children’s furniture industries and others they regulate. Is there payoff involved? Absolutely. Want proof? The U.S. has become inundated with recalls of children’s products because of high levels of lead paint, under the Bush administration.
Our children are being put at risk by unethical industries that ignore safety requirements in their pursuit to make profit. They use substandard materials and our children are getting sick because of it. Parents are getting sick of it too.
These individuals are government employees and fall under the same ethical guidelines as every other government official concerning gifts. The industries who are regulated by the CPSC is guilty of bribery and the agency is guilty of accepting bribes. There is no other way to say it.
This practice of paying for travel is commonly called “gift travel”. This practice has become embedded as part of the benefits package of heads of regulatory agencies. When we can no longer count on regulatory agencies to protect us where does that leave us?
Once again our government has proven that it does not care about the safety of our children or of us as a whole. As long as they get pampered at the expense of someone else they will always be faced with returning the ‘favor’. And they do return the favor. Want proof of that too? The CPSC flew to China and Hong Kong in 2004 at the expense of the American Fireworks Standards Laboratory based in Bethesda, Maryland. Their laboratories are in Asia. The CPSC claims there were no regulatory requests pending at the time, hinting that there was no payoff involved, but rest assured the AFSL got a tax write-off for the travel and they expect the CSPC to reciprocate by looking favorably on safety standards that will favor the AFSL.
More egregious instances involve going soft on industries who have, this past summer, flooded the market with Chinese-made toys with hazardous levels of lead. The CPSC has gone soft on industries by opting for “voluntary” standards and repeatedly not taking legal action against businesses that refuse to recall dangerous products. Are we, the consumers being protected by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? NO! Are businesses being favored by the Consumer Product Safety Commission? YES!
Are we being shown that “voluntary” adherence to safety regulations is not working? YES! What is the Consumer Product Safety Commission going to do about it? NOTHING! Because they have been bought and paid for.
This government is more concerned with making revenue from taxes generated by these industries doing business in the U.S. than they are about our safety. That much has been made abundantly clear. Does this agency need to take these trips to the factories to see the process of product manufacture? No, they don’t. These products are tested here in the U.S. by the CPSC or its affiliates. The FDA tests products before they are released to the market. Why is the process different for the CPSC?
If the government is truly concerned with our safety, these products should be tested before they ever reach the American consumer.
CPSC officials defend the industry-paid trips as a way for the agency to be in contact with manufacturing officials and hear their concerns despite a limited travel budget. These manufacturing officials need to fly to the CPSC offices to voice their concerns, not give the impression of impropriety through “gift travel”.
Commission spokeswoman Julie Vallese said the agency's counsel and its ethics officers conducted "a full conflict-of-interest analysis" of the trips and stand behind their decisions. This is in the best interest of the agency to employ counsel and its ethics officers who will “stand up” for the agency. Their voracity and honesty are in question.
"The mission of the agency and the benefits to consumer safety are two factors that are taken into consideration in approving gift travel," she said. Reports of the trips are submitted to the Office of Government Ethics, she added. It is plain to see that the ‘benefits to consumer safety’ have taken a back seat in light of all of the recent recalls this country has seen.
This “gift travel” bribery scheme is in clear violation of ethics codes. Why does an ethics code even have to be in writing? Why can’t we find someone ethical enough to sit at the heads of government offices? Why does the consumer, the taxpayer, the very people who pay through the nose to support these governmental agencies have to continuously be on the loosing end of everything?
Ann Brown, who served as chairman, under the Clinton administration, from 1994 to 2001, traveled only at the expense of the agency or of media organizations that sponsored appearances where she announced product recalls. "We hated to have an industry pay for our staff for anything," said Pam Gilbert, a lawyer who was executive director of the agency under Brown. What does this say about the Republican party vs. the Democratic party? I think it is very telling. Ethics have gone to hell since Bush took office. Ethics scandals have reached unprecedented levels under the republican controlled congress. I know there is no shortage of ethics violations for democrats, after all they are all politicians.
If the agency got by under the Clinton administration without taking bribes it can do it under the Bush and future administrations. The atmosphere under Bush made it easy for the agency to throw ethics out the window and take these unnecessary trips.
Accepting gifts opens the door to more suspicion. Chances are this is just the tip of the iceberg. Chances are there are more shady dealings going on behind closed doors. Since the agency has shown it is willing to accept this sort of bribery, we, the taxpayer, can’t help but become suspicious of any action this agency takes.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
U.S. court rules against religious freedom
The Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas, and its leaders, were ordered to pay $10.9 million for funeral protest.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
There are really two issues here. One is the right for a church to preach what it believes and the second is the right of a family to solemnly grieve for its lost family member. This group did not respect that family’s grief and that is abominable. Especially from a group of people who claim to be Christian.
A federal jury in Baltimore, Maryland, Wednesday awarded $10.9 million to the father of a Marine whose funeral was picketed by members of a fundamentalist church carrying signs blaming soldiers' deaths on America's tolerance of homosexuals. (Can you believe the convoluted thinking that went into this charge).
Church members showed up at Snyder's funeral chanting derogatory slogans and holding picket signs with messages including "God Hates Fags."
They've picketed the funerals of dozens of troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that God is punishing the United States because of its tolerance for homosexuality.
Some of the other signs at the funeral included "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Thank God for IEDs."
They are preaching hatred and intolerance. It is unforgivable for any group who claims to believe in God, to preach hatred against the very humans that God created. Their hearts have been blackened by hatred and prejudiced by what they believe is ‘wrong thinking’ behavior.
I can’t believe these people would put their bigoted hate on public display. They have no shame.
These are Christians who supposedly believe in a forgiving and just God. To paraphrase Rush Limbaugh these are ‘fake Christians’.
Church founder, Fred Phelps, says the case is about "putting a preacher on trial for what he preaches." He is patting himself on the back for being important.
He obviously wants to make himself a martyr in this cause and he would be a dangerous man if it weren’t so laughable that he thinks God could hate one of his own children.
The courts action to sue a religious group for what it preaches is a desperate and dangerous attempt to silence a sector of this society for voicing what this country does not want to hear.
The method these people use to spread their message of hate is immoral. To thank God for killing someone is against everything that God represents and is unforgivably immoral and subhuman. The bible does say in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." This country’s Bill of Rights says its citizens have the freedom to say and do as they see fit.
It is immoral for this or any other group to disrupt the solemn practice of sending our loved ones back to the very God that these fools believe hates him for being American.
I was born into a Baptist family. I was raised Baptist and I can tell you that this group is an embarrassment to all Christians and does not represent the mainstream religious community.
God will take care of these bigots and He will take care of homosexuals as He sees fit, our court system should stay out of it.
Diplomats don’t want to go to Iraq
U.S. foreign diplomats are being forced to serve in Iraq under penalty of dismissal for refusing. It seems their new plush, multi-million dollar Baghdad facility is not incentive enough for them to do their jobs. It also seems they are very worried about being killed.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Perhaps they have no faith in the White House private army, i.e., Blackwater, to protect them. And they have no faith in the U.S. military to keep them from harms way.
Perhaps they lack faith in what Bush and his generals are trying to force us all to believe. That the war has turned around and the streets of Iraq are now safe.
These diplomats reflect what the rest of America sees, that Iraq isn’t worth the fight. These individuals don't have any faith that the centuries of hatred between the two main groups of people that make up Iraq will ever tolerate each other.
The State Department will allow potential assignees to prove a valid medical condition as basis for not going. I can just see it now, all of the 200 people informed this week as prime candidates for assignment will be rushing to their doctors attempting to find a way out of “DOING THEIR JOB”.
Forced assignments have not been used since the Vietnam War era. But they all have agreed to worldwide availability and now their time has come to fulfill that obligation.
The Foreign Service corp owes the American soldier, who has sacrificed most over there, and the American public, who has suffered world ridicule at the havoc that this president has brought to Iraq, to do their part to bring this immoral occupation to an end.
The U.S. should have used diplomats long before considering using our military to force our point of view onto Iraq.
To those diplomats who will go to Iraq I wish them best of luck and I pray they are able to overcome the damage that the mentally imbalanced and morally petulant Bush/Cheney team has brought to the Iraqi people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)