FINDLAY, Ohio – A student at a fundamentalist Baptist school that forbids dancing, rock music, hand-holding and kissing will be suspended if he takes his girlfriend to her public high school prom, his principal said.
Despite the warning, 17-year-old Tyler Frost, who has never been to a dance before, said he plans to attend Findlay High School’s prom Saturday.
Frost, a senior at Heritage Christian School in northwest Ohio, agreed to the school’s rules when he signed a statement of cooperation at the beginning of the year, principal Tim England said.
The teen, who is scheduled to receive his diploma May 24, would be suspended from classes and receive an “incomplete” on remaining assignments, England said. Frost also would not be permitted to attend graduation but would get a diploma once he completes final exams. If Frost is involved with alcohol or sex at the prom, he will be expelled, England said.
Frost’s stepfather Stephan Johnson said the school’s rules should not apply outside the classroom.
“He deserves to wear that cap and gown,” Johnson said.
Frost said he thought he had handled the situation properly. Findlay requires students from other schools attending the prom to get a signature from their principal, which Frost did.
“I expected a short lecture about making the right decisions and not doing something stupid,” Frost said. “I thought I would get his signature and that would be the end.”
England acknowledged signing the form but warned Frost there would be consequences if he attended the dance. England then took the issue to a school committee made up of church members, who decided to threaten Frost with suspension.
“In life, we constantly make decisions whether we are going to please self or please God. (Frost) chose one path, and the school committee chose the other,” England said.
The handbook for the 84-student Christian school says rock music “is part of the counterculture which seeks to implant seeds of rebellion in young people’s hearts and minds.”
England said Frost’s family should not be surprised by the school’s position.
“For the parents to claim any injustice regarding this issue is at best forgetful and at worst disingenuous,” he said. “It is our hope that the student and his parents will abide by the policies they have already agreed to.”
The principal at Findlay High School, whose graduates include Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, said he respects, but does not agree with, Heritage Christian School’s view of prom.
“I don’t see (dancing and rock music) as immoral acts,” Craig Kupferberg said.
Of course, the liberal Blogosphere is going crazy over there. But here’s the little problem. The boy’s parents knowingly signed an agreement; stating that their kid would not partake in any activities that the school found to be unacceptable. I have news for the Liberals; this sort of thing is absolutely normal for most Christian schools. As someone who basically grew up in those sort of schools, I ought to know this. The media also goes out of it’s way to mention the fact that the school is run by a group of Fundamental Baptists. That’s more of the Liberal attack on Christians.
The point is this; the child’s step father is now complaining about something that the parents signed an agreement to uphold and the School, legally has the right to tell the kid, that he will get into trouble, if he breaks the agreement. If I were this school, I would expel this troublemaker and further more; I would sue, in court, the step father of the senior in question.
This is nothing more, than another attack by the Liberals on Christians. I trust that Bill O’Reilly will be featuring this on his show. I am also surprised that other Conservative bloggers are not standing up for this school.
ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was briefed on the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah in September 2002, according to a report prepared by the Director of National Intelligence’s office and obtained by ABC News.
The report, submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee and other Capitol Hill officials Wednesday, appears to contradict Pelosi’s statement last month that she was never told about the use of waterboarding or other special interrogation tactics. Instead, she has said, she was told only that the Bush administration had legal opinions that would have supported the use of such techniques.
The report details a Sept. 4, 2002 meeting between intelligence officials and Pelosi, then-House intelligence committee chairman Porter Goss, and two aides. At the time, Pelosi was the top Democrat on the House intelligence committee.
The meeting is described as a “Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of particular EITs that had been employed.”
EITs stand for “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a classification of special interrogation tactics that includes waterboarding.
Of course, everyone on the right is jumping up and down and saying, “See we told you so!” Don’t count me in with that crowd, please. When it comes to this entire issue; I am a fence sitter. On one hand, I hate to know that a fellow human being is being tortured. But on the other hand, I also know what happened on September 11, 2001, and please; do not come in here and spout that stupid Alex Jones bullcrap about 9/11 being an inside job, okay? I am just not that simple-minded to believe that idiotic nonsense. The truth is that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by Muslim extremists who hate our Country and for what we stand for; they also happened because of our interventionist foreign policy and because of our occupation of parts of Arab peninsula. Further, the attacks were a revenge attack on United States because of the actions of the United States in the 1980’s. Osama Bin Ladin said that in one of his many tapes. This is NOT to say that the United States had it coming or anything of that sort. It is simply the bare, and sometimes ugly; truth.
Now back to the story at hand, there are some, mostly liberals who have problems with this story. Emptywheel, for example seems to believe that the CIA is lying about the briefings. I won’t quote here, what’s being said there. Because there is just so much to read. I’d advise everyone to just go over and read what is being said there.
The truth is folks, I do not believe we will ever know the truth about what happened, and who knew what when. I am sorry if that busts any balloons or anything of that sort. Our Government has a very good track record of covering up secrets and quite frankly covering it’s backside to the point of burying the truth. So for those who were hoping that Bush and Co. would be prosecuted. I hate to be the one to say this, but you are in for a big letdown. I knew this was coming; I blogged about a great deal of times. Obama will not go after the former President and his staff and cabinet. Obama just will not burn the political capital. President Obama would rather risk being a one-term President, than try and go after a former President and his staff. It just never has been done. Nor will it ever.
If the Obama Administration told holder to open an investigation as to “Who knew what, when…” when it came to the 9/11 attacks, The Iraq War, and the torture stuff. Both Parties; Democratic and Republican would be utterly destroyed and stripped void of any credibility that they still have now. That is something that the Obama Administration is simply not going to allow to happen. Because both of these political parties want to maintain their grip on a two party system in this Country. One Party may talk about wanted to see the other destroyed. But they know how long their leash is, and when it reaches it max length, the parties that be know when to get back into line.
So, I feel that this all just a big witch hunt, to distract us from the real issues. Like the state of our economy and so forth.
It is for good reason that many Christians (and non-Christians, for that matter) are looking twice at modern military service. In fact, a retired high-ranking military officer (whose name I will not divulge) recently told me, “Chuck, there is no way I could recommend that anyone volunteer in the U.S. military today.”
Obviously, we have a host of honorable men and women of sound character and conviction still serving in both the U.S. military and in various law enforcement agencies. Thank God!
It is also obvious, however, that the powers that be are quickly “remaking” (to use Barack Obama’s word) our military and law enforcement agencies into an image never desired or designed by America’s Founding Fathers. Thus, the conflict between good men and bad policies will only worsen. And many will continue to question the wisdom of giving their sons and daughters to modern military service.
On the other hand, an argument could be made that it is at such a time as this that good men are all the more needed in the U.S. military and in law enforcement. That is a very valid argument, by the way: as long as those good men realize what they will be required to risk when their superiors order them to surrender allegiance to the Constitution or to sacred principle. But then again, we are all required to share in that risk, are we not?
All we have done is switch the color of the victims with the color of the beneficiaries. Today it is white males applying for jobs and promotions as cops, firemen, government workers, who are held back because their color does not comport with the desired “diversity.”
What New Haven has done to Frank Ricci is like the U.S. Olympic Committee throwing out all the trial heat results in the 100- and 200-meter races because not a single white runner qualified.
New Haven contends the “disparate impact” of the test hurts the black community, proving discrimination. But does the relative absence of blacks in the National Hockey League prove discrimination?
If the Republican Party wants a future, it will become again the party that stands on the principle that “No discrimination means no discrimination,” that stands with the victims of state bigotry, and that stands up to hypocrites like the Jim Crow liberals of New Haven.
Affirmative action began as a mandate to cast a wider net and ensure all had an equal shot. It has become a mighty engine of state injustice that seeks to remedy the consequences of past racial sins and crimes, by committing new ones.
In Michigan, Washington and California, none of them red states, majorities have voted to abolish affirmative action. Only Colorado failed in a dead heat last fall. A Republican drive to write into federal law an end to all race and gender preferences, as well as to all race and gender discrimination, is a cause whose time has
come.
This is a winning issue for the GOP, for it is rooted in principle and comports with what is written on the human heart. Down deep, even liberals know that what is being done to Frank Ricci is not right.
When Texas Governor Rick Perry suggested his state had the right to secede from the union, liberals laughed at the mere suggestion. But secession not only has deep American roots, but is no “crazier” than socialism.
“After careful consideration and many conversations with friends and family and the leadership of my party, I have decided not to seek the Republican nomination for Senate.
“I am enormously grateful for the confidence my party expressed in me, the encouragement and kindness of my fellow citizens in Pennsylvania and the valuable counsel I received from so many of my party colleagues. The 2010 race has significant implications for my party, and that required thoughtful reflection. All of the above made my decision a difficult and deeply personal conclusion to reach. However, this process also impressed upon me how fortunate I am to have so many friends who volunteered to support my journey if I chose to take it and continue to offer their support after I conveyed to them this morning how I believe I can best serve my commonwealth, my party and my country.
“Public service has long played a significant role in my life. That service does not end here. There are causes to which I remain intensely committed, including my work on behalf of the disability community, our nation’s veterans, our national security and the GOP — the party I enthusiastically joined more than four decades ago.
“To those who believe that the Republican Party is facing challenges; they are right. To those who believe the Democratic Party is without its own difficulties, they are wrong. No one party has a monopoly on all of the answers. The more important view, in my mind, is that we remember, whether Republican or Democrat, we are foremost Americans. And as Americans, we have always overcome challenges when we put partisanship aside and solutions first.
“And so my desire and intention is to help my party craft solutions that both sides of the aisle can embrace. My hope is to raise the level of civility in public debate and raise the bar on outcomes that serve our citizens fully, fairly and equally. My belief is that those in my home state can best be served by the principles of limited government, less taxes, competent governance and shared responsibility. So I stand ready and excited to help my party and my country prevail as we continue to work to preserve and protect our strong, storied and much beloved nation.
Some think this might be a blow to the G.O.P.; personally, I am not so sure. I believe that the Democrat’s might leave Arlen Specter twisting in the wind. However, Pat Toomy is running, and could use the support.
A very interesting piece is in the Wall Street Journal today, about the Republican Party and the Era of Ronald Reagan. Republicans and most Conservatives; including this writer, find themselves nostalgic about the Reagan era. The 1980’s was a magical time for me. I could get into all that; but this entry would soon turn into a sappy trip down memory lane. Because I am not ready to break out the ensure and reminisce about the good old days just yet, I will spare you the stories. —– I mean, I am only 36 people, give a guy a break!
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush made headlines last weekend suggesting it’s time for the party to get over its glory days: “I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [GOP] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause.” Joyful Democratic bloggers put this more clearly in five tight words: GOP Needs to Forget Reagan.
Is this true?
The answer to that historic question is an apt subject this week as the GOP, looking for a path from the wilderness, says farewell at National Cathedral tomorrow to Jack Kemp, who remained a Reaganite to the end.
Jack Kemp, anyone who spent time around him will tell you, stayed on message. That message, like Reagan’s, had a number of parts, but it is not possible to even guess how many times Jack Kemp summarized his explanations of that message in three words: “Work, save and invest.” Republicans should think hard about building a governing philosophy on the foundation of those three words, ideas that most voters understand.
The article goes on to praise Jack Kemp and to further praise Reagan and his ideals. Those ideals, I believe, are important to remember; Self-Reliance, Small Government, Personal Freedom, all are commendable principles and are ones that all Americans should know and believe in. However, it would be a monumental mistake to sit here and not acknowledge the fact that Ronald Reagan’s policies were not perfect at all. The fact is the man had flaws. As humans, we tend to gloss over the bad parts of a President legacy that we hold in high esteem. Even President Franklin Roosevelt, of whom I admire greatly, had flaws as well. Some of his policies did more to hurt, than they did to help.
Richard Gamble over at The American Conservative, writes a very interesting piece on the policies and legacy of President Ronald Reagan, here are some excerpts:
Such an endorsement from one of the greatest inspirations of the post-World War II conservative renaissance carries considerable authority with the movement. And rightly so. It should give pause to anyone reckless enough to challenge Reagan’s legacy. But that legacy itself raises nagging questions. The federal payroll was larger in 1989 than it had been in 1981. Reagan’s tax cuts, whatever their merits as short-term fiscal policy, left large and growing budget deficits when combined with increased spending, and added to the national debt. His tax increases were among the largest proportionate ones in U.S. history. And more than one historian has called Reagan’s foreign policy “Wilsonian.” In short, it is hard in 2009 to point to any concrete evidence that the Reagan Revolution fundamentally altered the nation’s trajectory toward bloated, centralized, interventionist government. Conservatism in the 1980s made its peace with much of liberalism—if not with all of its legislative agenda, then at least with its means to power. Republicans and Democrats now argue over how big the bailouts should be or how long the troops should remain deployed, rarely about first principles.
(…)
Reagan’s speeches abounded with themes that were anything but conservative. He aligned the Republican crusader more closely with America’s expansive liberal temperament. In particular, his brand of evangelical Christianity, combined with fragments of Puritanism, enlightenment optimism, and romantic liberalism, set Reagan apart in key ways from historic conservatism.
(…)
Reagan grew up in the 1920s in Dixon, Illinois in the pietistic, revivalist world of the Disciples of Christ—a world known to many millions of American evangelicals then and since. Biographer Edmund Morris’s Dutch (1999) and Paul Kengor’s God and Ronald Reagan (2004) make much of the “practical Christianity” espoused by Reagan’s mother, the local pastor and congregation, and such religious best-sellers as That Printer of Udell’s. This activist faith shared important assumptions with the social gospel’s “applied Christianity.” Both set out to remake the City of Man through the power of the church’s moral influence. Reagan’s spirituality was shaped by a “Jesus-only” populist Christianity that emphasized the conversion experience and an activist faith suspicious of creeds, rituals, ecclesiastical bodies, and denominational boundaries.
Reagan never turned away from this transformationist Christianity. It became a fundamental part of his civil religion. Historian John Patrick Diggins, in Ronald Reagan: Fate, Freedom, and the Making of History (2007), goes as far as to say that the president’s theology “seemed to offer a Christianity without Christ and the crucifixion, a religion without reference to sin, evil, suffering, or sacrifice.” Diggins’s implicit question, “Why couldn’t Reagan have been more like Reinhold Niebuhr?” may not be exactly the right one. Why should we expect our presidents to do theology at all, even neo-orthodox theology? But his point is well taken. Reagan’s optimistic Christianity seemed ready made for an America disinclined to hear talk of limits to power and wealth. The historic Christian message can sound downright un-American.
(…)
In a further criticism, Lukacs traced the “militarization of the image of the presidency” to Reagan. It was Reagan, after all, who began the practice of returning the salutes of the military—a precedent followed by every president since. While doing so may seem to honor the military, it in fact erodes the public’s understanding of the presidency as a civilian office, Lukacs argued. Indeed, Fox News bears out Lukacs’s warning. The cable news giant got into the habit during the Bush II administration of referring to the president as commander in chief no matter what story they were reporting, seemingly unaware that the nation’s executive is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the Untied States and not commander in chief of the American people at large. If the president visits a city ravaged by a hurricane, he is emphatically not there in his role as commander in chief. If every American thinks of the president—of whatever political party—as my commander in chief and not narrowly as the Army or Navy’s commander in chief, then we have taken another decisive step from republic to empire. If every American expects the president to be the commander in chief of the economy, then we can’t be surprised by nationalized banks and corporations.
I think it would be a good idea to read that article in it’s entirety to truly get what is being said. It is indeed a truly interesting article to read.
My take on the subject at hand is this; The Republican Party needs to catch up with the times. This is not 1981; this is 2009, America is facing some serious challenges in this new era. The Republican Party needs to provide a sane alternative to the socialist madness of the Democratic Party; doing so, while keeping Reagan’s principles in mind. But the Republican Party must also be mindful that some, not all, some of Reagan’s policies did more to hurt, than they did to help. If they do this properly, they will be able to retake the White House in 2012. Another important issue is who they choose to run against Obama in 2012. If they try and run someone like Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin, they are going to get eaten alive in the election. However, if they run someone like Mark Sanford; they might just have a chance at winning. The problem with the Republican Party has not been principles, but the framing of the Party’s message. The Party needs to be a little more Mark Sanford and Ron Paul, and maybe even Pat Buchanan and much less Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingraham. There is nothing wrong with Conservative principles, but when the people that are attempting to promote them are doing more to alienate, than they are to actually promote them, something is wrong.
It has been said, that you can catch more files with honey than you can with vinegar. The Republican Party needs to work on that.
Update: Thanks to memeornadum for the link in and hello to the readers from that service! 😀
Update #2: Hello to all the readers of the Moderate Voice, thanks to Joe for the link in! 😀
If there was any one person that I still feel funny about linking to, it’s Jonah Goldberg. When I was still “Left of Center”, I despised the man. However, once I switched my moderate “Right of center” position, I began to see that Mr. Goldberg was a bit more right about liberalism, than I thought.
Here’s a really perfectly distilled bit of stereotypical idiocy about the threat from the oogy-boogy-gun-loving-Right by Sara Robinson of the Campaign for America’s Future . It’s funny how I thought it was cribbed from David Neiwert and all of his campus coffeehouse philosophizing and — lo and behold — on page two the author reveals she is a colleague of Neiwert’s. It’s tiresome overheated nonsense that actually fits the us vs. them paranoia she ascribes to the Right better than most of the stuff you’ll ever find on the Right.
Do go follow the link, it is a very interesting read. I didn’t read it all myself. I couldn’t stomach the bile that comes out of the far left this early in the morning. Even I have limits. Even Goldberg’s readers were not very pleased with it either. Yes, I know, Goldberg is a Neo-Conservative; but he makes some very valid points about the left. Especially when it comes to tolerance, it seems that the Liberals of today are much less tolerate on dissenting opinions than they used to be; especially during this time of Obama’s Hope and Change mantra.
We’re off back to the same place we were at yesterday, to turn over the soil again. They’ve added fertilizer and some top soil and we’ve got to turn it under….again.
So, limited posting until the evening.
Please Note: Comments will be on moderate until I return.
Some of you might know this, but I submit some of my Blog postings over at a place called Freedom’s Phoenix. Freedom’s Phoenix is a Libertarian News Portal system, that I happen to enjoy, quite a bit.
Here is a video of the founder of Freedom’s Phoenix, Earnest Hancock being interviewed by Motorhome Diaries.
How the news coverage of the swine flu isn’t so much indicative of any serious crisis, but the mainstream media’s corporate and government, PC sensibilities.
That’s right. For once, Sir-Bald-Alot, AKA Mr. Clean Jr. or as a he is commonly known as, “Joe The Pumber” — made a few statements that I actually agree with; for a change. Well, somewhat….
His comments will be followed by my thoughts:
Q:In the last month, same-sex marriage has become legal in Iowa and Vermont. What do you think about same-sex marriage at a state level?
A: At a state level, it’s up to them. I don’t want it to be a federal thing. I personally still think it’s wrong. People don’t understand the dictionary—it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do—what man and woman are for. Now, at the same time, we’re supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they’re people, and they’re going to do their thing.
I would not have used the phrasing that Joe did, as that only invites Ad-hominem attacks from the left, and of course, Joe will be called a hate monger by the far liberal left. But I have to say, that I wholeheartedly agree with the guy here. If I were a Father, I would not want Homosexuals around my children either. Sorry if that offends some, but hey, I believe that I; as well as Joe, has a right to protect his children from any sort of behavor or lifestyle that deems to be immoral and out of the ordinary. You also notice that Joe does not condemn the people themselves or even thier lifestyle. He just says that he has the right to shield his children from those who choose to pratice the homosexual lifestyle. Which is his right.
Q:Why does conservatism appeal to you as a Christian?
A: Conservatism is about the basic rights of individuals. God created us. As far as the government goes, the Founding Fathers based the Constitution off of Christian values. It goes hand-in-hand. As far as the Republican Party? I felt connected to it because individual freedom should not be legislated by the federal government.
This is where Joe goes into a revisionist history of our Government. We were not founded as a Christian Republican or as a Theocracy. We were founded as a secular Republic, which paid homage; albiet a rather lame homage to a “God”. We did not get into specifics as to which God, at all. Joe is flat wrong here, and he is engaging in revisionist history; or at worst reading from Roger Simon’s or Neil Podhartz’s Script.
Q:Does the Republican Party reach out to evangelicals enough?
A: No. None of them stand up for anything. They use God as a punch line. They use God to invoke sympathy or invoke righteousness, but they don’t stay the course. That’s why I think that all needs to be taken out of the federal level and give it back to the states. We’ve lost our American history. Every state has “In God we trust” or “With God’s help” in their constitution. God is recognized as, if you will, America’s religion.
The first part of that, is absolutely correct, the Republican Party; starting of President Reagan used the Christian community as “Useful idiots”; back in the 1980’s. What did they get in return for it? Nothing. Prayer in schools is still outlawed, Abortion still happens every day. So much for Reagan’s promises eh? George W. Bush and his band second generation of Neo-Conservatives did this to a more abusive level, even to the point of laughing at them in the oval office. Bush even went as far as to rub it in their faces, after his term in the White House, as he said in a exit interview, that he was not a Bible literalist. This was seen by manyChristians as a slight towards them. Now the part about Christianity being America’s Religion; again Joe’s going off of the reservation with me. Because he is again, reciting that Christian Right fable that American was founded as a Christian Republic. That, I am afraid is a crock of bull. The United States States of America was founded by men, who just happened to Christians, although there are some, like myself; who happen to think that they were more Religious, then actual Christians. Benjamin Franklin, was, by most accounts an agnostic.
Q: Some people have criticized the Republican Party as being the party of the rich. How can they change their image?
A: I don’t know if they can change their image. I really don’t. But, you also have to take into consideration that the Democrats say they are for people in poverty. They’re not. They take advantage of all the tax breaks that the IRS has put in place for them. Tax lobbying is a billion-dollar industry up in Washington. Get rid of the tax code we have. Implement a fair tax—make it a level playing ground. People in poverty keep them in power—that’s what people have to understand.
I hate to say it, but Joe is right here as well. Personally, I do not see the problem with the well-off in this country having a party that represents them. Then again, I do not have that inbred hatred of those who are financially better off than I am. That is what the Democratic Party indoctrinates into people; hate or resent those who are better off than you, and rob them of their money and give to the poor. All of that is backward to the founding principles of this Country.
There’s more there, but these are the ones that I was interesting in commenting on.
A guy is driving around the back woods of Tennessee and he sees a sign in front of a broken down shanty-style house: “Talking Dog For Sale.” He rings the bell and the owner appears and tells him the dog is in the backyard. The guy goes into the backyard and sees a nice looking Labrador retriever sitting there.
“You talk?” he asks. “Yep,” the dog replies.
After the guy recovers from the shock of hearing a dog talk, he says “So, what’s your story?”
The dog looks up and says, “Well, I discovered that I could talk when I was pretty young. I signed up for a job at the airport to do some undercover security, wandering near suspicious characters and listening in. I uncovered some incredible dealings and was awarded several medals. I wanted to help America, so I interviewed with the the CIA. In no time at all they had me traveling around the world and hanging out with spies and world leaders. After all, no one figured a dog could eavesdrop. I proved to be one of their most valuable spies for a decade. But the jetting around really tired me out, and I knew I wasn’t getting any younger. So, I decided to settle down. I got married and had a mess of puppies. Now I’m just retired.”
The guy is amazed. He goes back in and asks the owner what he wants for the dog.
“Ten bucks,” the guy says.
“This dog is amazing! Why on earth are you selling him for just ten dollars?”
“Because he’s a liar! He never did any of that stuff!”
Yes, I have seen and know about the Video of Kareem Dale expressing his and the White House’s Love for MSNBC. However, I refuse to write a blog posting attacking the man, and I think if any of my fellow Conservatives had actually watched the video; they would have most likely not have attacked this man in the fashion in which they did.
The Video:
Notice anything overly different about him? No, I am not talking about him being a Democrat…..
The man is stone.friggin’.blind. —– Well, partially blind according to what I have read.
I have a rule, when it comes to blogging, writing and just life in general, and that rule is this; you just do not mock, bad mouth, or generally give a hard time to the handicapped. You just do not do that. I do not care what Mr. Dale said. He is blind, you do not mock the handicapped. If Mr. Dell would have said that he thought President Obama was Jesus Christ; I would feel the same way.
I hate to be the one to say this, but I think my fellow Conservatives need to go back and read books on manners. Because really, we are making our cause look horribly bad, at this point. Yes, I know what liberals did to John McCain during the election; So what? Does that make it automatically okay for we Conservatives, who are supposed to be better than the morally depraved liberals, to mock someone who has a handicap, that he has no control over? Not the last time I checked.
Sorry guys, whoever thought that it would be funny to bring this up, obviously did not look at the tape, and notice that they were about to mock a man, who was, essentially blind. Sorry to say it; but mocking the President is fair game, mocking his policies is also fair game. But mocking a man who has been blind his entire life, that is off limits in my book. As someone who has a developmentally disabled aunt, doing this sort of a thing is just god-awfully wrong.
I say this, because on a former blog, that I used to run; before it was hacked. I made one of those sort of mistakes, one so horrible that I do have the stomach to even mention what it was, mostly because I am ashamed of it. Let me just put it to you this way; remember what Ann Coulter said to that disabled vet, that go her tossed off of MSNBC for a long time? Remember what Michael Savage said that got his late night TV program cancelled? Something along those lines. Oh Yeah, I screwed up bad, and made many people angry for it; Mostly Conservatives. How is it that they now can mock this blind man, and it is okay? I just do not get it.
Anyway, There is my reason for not mocking Kareem Dale. I just wish others felt like I do. Maybe, just maybe our movement would be taken seriously again.
Oh boy, this is going to throw a monkey wrench into the plans of the Obama Administration:
Iranian aircraft attacked three villages inside Iraq over the weekend. The airstrikes — Iran’s first on Iraqi soil since the U.S. invasion — could complicate the Obama administration’s efforts to normalize relations with Tehran.
“The bombardments appeared to have targeted the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK), an Iranian Kurdish separatist group which has launched attacks on Iran from rear-supply bases in the mountains of northern Iraq,” AFP reports. Iran has attacked the Kurdish group before, with artillery. But this is the first time the Iranians followed up, with assaults from the air.
“The incident comes a week after reports of a clash between Iranian police officers and suspected PJAK fighters in the country’s western province of Kermanshah,” Al-Jazeera reports. “At least 10 policemen and 10 fighters were killed in the gun battle.”
Details on the airstrikes remain sketchy. Voice of America says the attacks were carried out by helicopters, which remained in Iranian airspace. Al-Arabiyah television, on the other hand, says it was “Iranian planes [that] raided those villages.”
Hmmm… Did not President Obama say this at one point?
Sounds like Barry is now going to get a full dose of reality, when it comes to Iran and their way of doing business. I wonder what he will do? Possibly employ some smart power and leadership to the situtation? Will he call for a meeting with the top military brass and make a decision based on the interests of the United States?
Don’t bet on it, he’s too busy out taking a stroll with his American-Hating, White Man-Hating Wife.
I am afraid that this is what the next 4 to 8 years is going to be like. International Threats and a Liberal President who is more interested in making photo ops that he is trying to defend our nation and interests. All the while spending this country into a giant economic hole. I am just glad, that I did not vote for the man; I couldn’t, I would not be able to live with myself, if I had of. The man is obviously not qualified for the office; and I am not talking about the Birth Certificate thing either. I am just referring to the man’s ability to lead the country. President Obama is a complete buffoon, who landed this election because of his skin color.
This should be a very interesting story to watch and follow. If it is not buried by our drool bucket Liberal Media. 🙄
Stop sending Uncle Jay the picture of the kid kissing the pig. Thanks. For more about how to protect yourself against whatever they’ve named the flu this week, do not watch TV or go on the internet. After all, Uncle Jay explains everything!
The following is written by a Fundamental Baptist Missionary, David Cloud; of whom a respect greatly. Please, keep this in mind when reading this. I present this for informational purposes only. As a disclaimer, the views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of this blog.
Updated April 23, 2009 (first published April 24, 1999) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) –
On April 20, 1999, two high school seniors filled with occultic hatred murdered 12 of their fellow students and a 47-year-old teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, before taking their own lives. The shooters also wounded another 20 students, some extremely seriously. At least one has never walked again and others have had long and difficult recoveries.
The Columbine murderers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, used shotguns, a rifle, a handgun, and pipe bombs in the attack. They laughed as they destroyed and mangled their victims. Witnesses reported that “they were just hooting and hollering, having the time of their lives.”
They had planned to kill hundreds, but their larger bombs did not explode. They rigged bombs out of propane tanks attached to gasoline cans and strung them with nails to enhance the shrapnel effect and placed them in the cafeteria, planning to detonate them when the room was packed with students and teachers at the height of the lunch period. They planned for the ensuing fireball to collapse the second floor onto the lunch room and thus add to the mayhem. They also rigged similar bombs and placed them in their cars and set them to explode 45 minutes after the initial blasts, intending to turn the cars into fireballs that would kill more students, plus paramedics, police, reporters, and others who were responding to the tragedy. By God’s grace, none of the propane bombs exploded.
At least 75 people have been killed on public school campuses since the Columbine shootings. Between 1992 and 2006 there were 330 murders committed by students on school property. The carnage was perpetrated by self-centered, hateful, vengeful, foul-mouthed students.
Early news reports stated that the Columbine murderers were members of a loose-knit group of young people who wore long trench coats, black clothing, and other “gothic” attire and delved into occultic and violent themes, but part of this turned out not to be true. The teens were wearing trench coats the day of the mass murder, but they were not members of the so-called Trench Coat Gang. Early reports also speculated that the boys lashed out at athletes and other popular teens because they had experienced constant bullying and social ostracism. In fact, both boys had a fairly wide circle of friends and were the bullies rather than the bullied, and they did not target athletes or any other particular group. They hated everybody! “Dylan laughed about picking on the new freshmen and [others]. Neither one complained about bullies picking on them–they boasted about doing it themselves” (Dave Cullen, Columbine, 2009, p. 258). Eric went through his junior yearbook and defaced the photos of the majority of his fellow students, labeling them “worthless,” writing that they would die, or making an X over their pictures (Columbine, p. 257). Read More …
His beef with President Obama: Liberals and progressives aren’t getting much face time. “He turns his back on people who have nowhere to go politically but to support him,” — “And that’s a very bad sign.” — “You don’t spend trillions of dollars with a massive detour of that money at Wall Street. You’ve got to go to the communities”
Some sad news, that I put off blogging about until now. I was not going to even blog about it. Namely because I did not know a thing about the man. So, I won’t pretend that I do.
Here’s a round up of comments about the passing of Jack Kemp:
“Jack Kemp was a leader – whether it was in a football huddle, a national political campaign or a policy discussion about the Austrian school of economics.
“I first met Jack nearly 40 years ago, during his freshman year in Congress. When he introduced The Jobs Creation Act – a major legislative advance of supply-side economics – I knew I had found an ally. That ally soon became my friend
“Jack was a ‘bleeding-heart conservative.’ He wanted to make it possible for every American to succeed and eagerly worked with people of all races, colors and creeds toward that end.
“Across-the-board tax cuts and ‘enterprise zones’ for blighted neighborhoods are now common economic prescriptions – especially during these hard times. But to make these ideas respectable, Jack had to fight for them constantly during his years in Congress, as Housing and Urban Development secretary, as chairman of a national tax reform commission, and during his presidential and vice presidential campaigns.
“He won those fights, and millions benefited. The tax cuts that Jack helped engineer in the 1980s gave Americans unprecedented prosperity for decades. His commission also boldly proposed a national flat tax. Those policies also helped spread freedom around the world.
“I remember standing with him in Moscow’s Red Square in 1990. The Cold War was starting to thaw, but few even suspected that the Soviet Union’s days were numbered. Jack knew. As we stood on the square, in view of the Kremlin, he pointed out an astonishing sign: The line for the new McDonald’s restaurant was longer than the line for Lenin’s tomb.
“Many people will remember Jack as a great football player – and rightly so. But he was also a great player in the world of ideas, with a mind as strong as his arm. I will miss his strength and friendship greatly.” —Edwin Feulner -President -Heritage Foundation
***
For those of us who came of age politically after Reagan was President, Jack Kemp was, if not Reagan, then the next best thing. He was arguably the most consequential and electric conservative between Reagan and Newt. Had Kemp run for President in 1996, I would have been his first volunteer (I missed ’88). Of course, Kemp’s contributions to the cause of freedom long predated that time, having helped Reagan break the grip of an oppressive marginal tax regime. —Patrick Ruffini – Founder – The Next Right
***
The “Kemp-Roth” tax cuts were at the cornerstone of Ronald Reagan’s early legacy as president and his brand of fiscal conservatism and innovative ideas to spur the entrepreneurial spirit were a huge part of the Republican Party of my formative period. By 1996, when he ran with Bob Dole, has was becoming an outlier in the party because of his relative moderation on social issues like affirmative action (thus the “bleeding-heart” descriptor). – James Joyner – Outside the Beltway
***
As the nation struggles with the trillion-dollar deficits and promises from Democrats to increase the role of government—the very government that got us into this hole in the first place—the ramparts of the free market will not be manned by Jack Kemp. –No Sheeples Here!
***
Jack Kemp, in my mind, was the premier Republican on race relations in American politics. No one spoke to the power of markets and opportunity to empower black Americans as he did. His agenda as HUD Secretary in the first Bush administration would still be light years ahead if its time if applied today. We need more conservatives like him. What a wonderful man, and a great loss to the nation. – Donald Douglas — American Power
***
“A successor to Ronald Reagan who himself has not had a successor. When his cancer was announced earlier this year, Jeff Lord wrote movingly about him and the greatness he had in him. I remember him from several live moments. Once at an American Spectator gala dinner right after the fall of Communism. “Wlady, did you think Vaclav Havel would be president of Czechoslovakia?” he asked from the podium. We always forget what a champion of freedom he was not just at home. Bob Tyrrell had introduced Jack as a perfect specimen of “sound body, sound mind.” Was he ever. I remember him on the floor of the San Diego convention in 1996. He was the announced vice-presidential nominee, basking in adulation and adoring fans. But he shut everyone up around him at that moment, his eyes rapt in attention directed at the podium, where Rep. J.C. Watts was delivering that evening’s keynote. You didn’t mess with Jack when he was in charge. Everyone quickly got quiet and paid attention to Watts too. Jack’s football position was quarterback — but in fact his position was leader. Even at the small Saturday Evening Club dinner he once attended as our guest, where he felt called upon to tell other guests when to come to the table and where to sit. He couldn’t help himself. Wherever man still wants to breathe freely, his memory will remain cherished. Jack Kemp in all his splendid energy will be terribly missed.” — Wlady Pleszczynski – The American Spectator
Kemp had the courage to move beyond the usual issues for conservatives, choosing to work on poverty and housing issues, and challenging his fellow conservatives to make conservatism work across the board. It’s one of the reasons why Kemp will be missed. — Ed Morrissey – HotAir
****
Didn’t agree with him on many core issues, but he was a GOP institution with a wonderful family. – Michelle Malkin
***
At a time when conservatives are trying to find their way ideologically and rhetorically, they would do well to emulate this most happy and principled warrior. He will be greatly missed. — Jennifer Rubin – Commentary Magazine’s Contentions
***
Kemp and those around him liked to explain his political outlook in part by reference to his encounters with racial segregation while a professional football player. Kemp found it stomach-turning that his black teammates were denied whites’ accommodations in the South simply on account of their race. In this, as in much else about him, there is a great deal to admire. It helps to account for the fact that in the 1980s, many were happy to consider ourselves Kemp supporters—and thought him far the best candidate for president in 1988. —Kevin R. C. Gutzman – Taki’s Magazine
So, there you have it. The round up of voices on the man. May He Rest in Peace and My Prayers to the family.
Update: Right on Schedule, The far lefty loons are attacking this man with fury. See here and here. I guess they had to sleep it off first. But, there you go…. The tolerance and civility of the Democrat Party. You see now, why I’ll never vote for another Liberal Democrat? Amazing. 🙄
I don’t watch this stuff, because I do not much care for Laura Ingraham; her screechy harpy nasally voice makes my stomach turn. However, she does deserve a few points, i think, for putting this idiot feminist liberal bitch in her place.
Personally, I think the castigation of Miss California Carrie Prejean by the liberal left is just wrong. But the demagoguery of position of both sides, is just maddening.
I won’t watch it, but it’s good for hits, I suppose.
