Guest Column

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=95 BGCOLOR="#000000" TEXT="#F7F7FF"> <div> <FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Vrinda" ><B>the</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Vrinda" ><I><B><U>right</U></B></I></FONT><FONT SIZE="6" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Vrinda" ><B>slant.com</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Vrinda" ><B>.......... never afriad to be </B></FONT><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#FFFFFF" FACE="Vrinda" ><I><B><U>right</U></B></I></FONT><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Vrinda" ><B>!</B></FONT><FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><B>   </B><B> </B></FONT><B> </B><B>|     </B><A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="therightslant.com"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id191.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Quick Slant"><U>The Quick Slant</U></A>   |   Guest Column   |   <A HREF="id195.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="TEA Party Pics"><U>TEA Party Pics</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=190 BGCOLOR="#000000" TEXT="#F7F7FF"> <div> Back to the home page...<A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="therightslant.com"><U>therightslant.com</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id197.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The Right Slant 2011"><U>The Right Slant 2011</U></A></div> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> Comment by email:</div> <div> <A HREF="mailto:respond@eatananimal.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:respond@eatananimal.com"><U>respond@therightslant.com</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#submission_guidelines" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Submission Guidelines</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#racial_double_standards_plague_ron_paul" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Racial double standards plague Ron Paul</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_american_dream_sick_but_not_dead" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The American Dream: Sick But Not Dead</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_promises_of_god_are_our_foundation_" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Promises of God are our Foundation </I></U></A><I>, by Lisa Harper</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#obama_s_america_in_black___white" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Obama's America in Black & White</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#five_arguments_against_gay_marriage" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Five arguments against gay marriage</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#thank_god_for_obama_s_broken_promises" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Thank God for Obama's Broken Promises</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#donald_trump_scores_an_important" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Donald Trump Scores an Important victory . . . over the media</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#a_flashback_in_time" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">A flashback in time</I></U></A><I>, by Lisa Harper</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#charlie_sheen_s_lunacy_is_no_recent" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Charlie Sheen's lunacy is no recent development</I></U></A><I>, by Seth Forman</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#sustainable_development_robs_property" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Sustainable development robs property rights</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#eminent_domain_for_what_" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Eminent Domain for What?</I></U></A><I> by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_ghost_of_thanksgiving_yet_to_come" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Ghost of Thanksgiving Yet to Come</I></U></A><I>, Anonymous (submitted by Wilson Forbes, Jr.)</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#gastonia_s_tax_and_spend_regime" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Gastonia's Tax and Spend Regime</I></U></A><I>, by Jim Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#greenways___the_paths_to_government" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Greenways - The paths to government power over your property</I></U></A><I>, by Chery Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#malaprops_for_christmas" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Malaprops for Christmas</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#coming_to_grips_with_my_inner_tipper" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Coming to grips with my inner Tipper</I></U></A><I>, by Jonna Bishop Bingham</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#going_begging" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Going Begging!</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#scam_on_you" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Scam On You</I></U></A><I>!, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#blacks_have_separated_themselves_from" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Blacks Have Separated Themselves from</I></U></A><I> America, by Cheryl Pass.</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_power_of_policy_wonks_and_you" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Power of Policy Wonks and You</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_ruling_class_in_america___angelo_m_" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Ruling Class in America</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#no_such_thing_as_carbon_neutral" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">No Such Thing as Carbon Neutral</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#arrogantocracy_and_rankin_lake" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Arrogantocracy and Rankin Lake</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#dependent_vs__independent_our_national" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Dependent vs. Independent Our national</I></U></A><I> problem, by Wilson A. Forbes, Jr.</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#which_history_do_we_celebrate_" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Which History Do We Celebrate?</I></U></A><I> by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#classical_progressivism_vs__american" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Classical Progressivism vs. American</I></U></A><I> Exceptionalism, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#american_absolution" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">American Absolution</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#on_the_general_welfare" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">On the General Welfare</I></U></A><I>, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_price_of_everything__the_value_of" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Price of Everything; the Value of</I></U></A><I> Nothing, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#health_care___energy_monopoly__" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Health Care & Energy Monopoly =</I></U></A><I> Obamanopoly, by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#you_thought_you_knew_the_news" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">You Thought You Knew the News</I></U></A><I> by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#what_does_it_mean_to_be_a__real" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">What does it mean to be a “Real</I></U></A><I> American?" by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#the_curious_case_of_mr__bing" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The Curious Case of Mr. Bing</I></U></A><I> by Cheryl Pass</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#an_encounter_with_the_unhinged" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">An Encounter with the Unhinged</I></U></A><I> by Daria DiGiovanni</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#celebrating_dependence_day" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Celebrating Dependence Day</I></U></A><I> </I>by Cheryl Pass</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#female_jealousy_and_sarah_palin" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Female Jealousy and Sarah Palin</I></U></A><I> by </I>Daria DiGiovanni</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#a_letter_to_the_rnc_" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">A letter to the RNC.</I></U></A><I> by </I>Wilson Forbes, Jr<I>.</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm#very_bad_medicine_a_surgeon_s" TARGET="TRLX_Middle" TITLE="Guest Column"><U><I><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700c8ffffff00.png" HEIGHT="13" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Very Bad Medicine a Surgeon's</I></U></A><I> Perspective on Nationalized Healthcare. by </I> Daria DiGiovanni</div> </td> <td valign="top" height=385 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <B><U>Guest Column</U></B></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="racial_double_standards_plague_ron_paul"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Racial double standards plague Ron Paul</div> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >By Seth Forman</FONT><FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" > </FONT>(<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A>)</div> <bR> <div> Now that Ron Paul has achieved electoral respectability in the Republican primaries, the media is in high <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/opinion/mr-pauls-discredited-campaign.html?_r=1&ref=opinion" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/opinio"><U>dudgeon</U></A></FONT> over his <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/29/ron-pauls-world/?ref=opinion" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2"><U>extremism</U></A></FONT>. Paul, according to the procurators of good taste at the <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/opinion/mr-pauls-discredited-campaign.html?_r=3&ref=opinion" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/opinio"><U><I>New York Times</I></U></A></FONT>, "long ago disqualified himself for the presidency" by, among other things, "peddling claptrap proposals" such as "cutting a third of the federal budget."</div> <bR> <div> The <I>Times </I>doesn't bother to explain why it feels cutting the federal budget by one-third is radical enough to disqualify a person from the presidency, but increasing it by one-third, as Obama did his first year in <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/krugman-misleads-government-spending-economic-growth_508790.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/krug"><U>office</U></A></FONT>, is "<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/new-york-times-editorial-we-need-more" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/n"><U>exactly what the country needs</U></A></FONT>." But now Paul has "made things worse" by not adequately repudiating newsletters from the 1970s in which he claimed that "95 percent of Washington's black males were criminals," that Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday is a "Hate Whitey Day," that the U.S. has a "disappearing white majority," that Mossad was responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, and that some gay men deliberately spread the AIDS virus.</div> <bR> <div> In getting exercised about the extremist views of presidential candidates, the <I>Times </I>has arrived about three years late. The <I>grand dame</I> of liberal sanctimony showed no such disgust over Barack Obama's failure to repudiate similar kinds of extremism in 2008. In fact, after hate-filled sermons by Obama's longtime pastor Reverend Jeremiah Wright became public, Obama took to a nationally televised speech precisely to avoid repudiating the good Reverend, saying that he could "no more disown him [Reverend Wright] than I can my white grandmother." The response of the <I>New York Times </I>was to swoop in and declare the speech "Lincolnesque" and "Obama's Profile in Courage," as if, according to Mark Steyn, "the paranoid racist ravings of Jeremiah Wright are now part of the established cultural discourse in African American life and thus must command our respect."</div> <bR> <div> If it is okay to disqualify Ron Paul as a presidential candidate for being associated with newsletters that described Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthday as "Hate Whitey Day," then why wasn't Obama disqualified for associating with a Reverend who exclaimed that "white people's greed runs a world in need?" This particular gem came from a Wright speech that so impressed Obama that the latter borrowed its title for his own autobiography, <I>The Audacity of Hope</I>.</div> <bR> <div> If Paul can be disqualified for newsletters lamenting the country's "disappearing white majority," why wasn't Obama disqualified for joining the PlaceNameTrinity PlaceNameBaptist PlaceTypeChurch in placeCityChicago, where members must pledge to uphold the "Black Values System," which commits blacks to patronizing only black-owned stores and warns blacks to avoid the white "entrapment of black 'middleclassness'"? If Paul can be disqualified for newsletters suggesting that some gay men with AIDS deliberately spread that disease, than why was Obama not disqualified for telling a <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/11/obamas-interview-with-cathleen.html/feed" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/"><U>reporter</U></A></FONT> that another black preacher, the Reverend James T. Meeks of the Salem Baptist Church in Chicago, was "a close friend and colleague" whom he "<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/2008/11/obamas-interview-with-cathleen.html/feed" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://blog.beliefnet.com/stevenwaldman/"><U>looked</U></A></FONT> to for guidance"? Meeks is renowned for his anti-homosexual crusade and for <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0033CC" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59735/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.wnd.com/2008/03/59735/"><U>blaming</U></A></FONT> "Hollywood Jews for bringing us <I>Brokeback Mountain</I>[.]"</div> <bR> <div> If Ron Paul can be disqualified for praising Ed and Elaine Brown, a New Hampshire couple who refused to pay federal income taxes and instigated a five-month armed standoff with United States marshals in 2007, then why wasn't Obama disqualified for launching his Illinois State Senate run from the Hyde Park home of longtime associate Bill Ayers, who by his own admission participated in the bombings of New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972?</div> <bR> <div> The larger meaning of Ron Paul's campaign has little to do with his appeal to a certain percentage of Republican voters. It has to do with the lasting damage caused by placecountry-regionAmerica's ongoing racial double standard -- to wit: sympathetic but race-conscious media elites and large numbers of voters ignored, cloaked, and misrepresented Obama's radicalism. The country is now shackled by a set of policies and narratives (a massive new health care entitlement, unprecedented levels of government dependence, debilitating industrial and environmental regulation, foreign policy apologetics, and "blame the rich" class warfare) from which there is no certain escape. placecountry-regionAmerica, in short, would be a lot better off today if we played extremism with a racially even hand.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> First published at American Thinker (<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#003399" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/ron_paul_and_double_standards.html#ixzz1jUUtnXfL" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/r"><U>http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/01/ron_paul_and_double_standards.html#ixzz1jUUtnXfL</U></A></FONT>)</div> <bR> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_american_dream_sick_but_not_dead"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The American Dream: Sick But Not Dead</div> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >By Seth Forman </FONT>(<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A>)</div> <div>  </div> <div> The American Dream of the past eighty years has been defined as single-family home ownership. Suburbs and single-family homeownership appear to fulfill very powerful aspirations for large numbers of people. "The suburban dream house is the idealization of every immigrant's Dream -- the vassal's dream of his own castle," wrote Italian-born immigrant Edgardo Contini. "Europeans who come here are delighted by our suburbs. Not to live in an apartment! It is a universal aspiration to own your own home." </div> <bR> <div> Today, those aspirations have become extremely difficult for vast numbers of young people and newcomers to fulfill. The news from the housing market is <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/baker010611.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2011/bak"><U><U>bad</U></U></A></FONT>. Home prices <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/06/02/the-death-of-the-american-dream-i" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/w"><U><U>today</U></U></A></FONT> are lower in most of the country than they were in the dismal month of April 2009; we are now in the second dip of the double dip housing downturn. The financial crisis that started in 2008 has made home mortgages extremely difficult to obtain. Since the financial crisis began, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://mortgage.ocregister.com/2010/03/08/1-million-u-s-homes-lost-to-foreclosure-since-2008/28179/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://mortgage.ocregister.com/2010/03/0"><U><U>over one million</U></U></A></FONT> consumer mortgages have gone into foreclosure. Sales of bank-owned properties are now <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.cnbc.com/id/42904204/National_Home_Prices_Double_Dip" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.cnbc.com/id/42904204/National"><U><U>34.5 percent</U></U></A></FONT> of the housing market; homes in foreclosure waiting for resale now account for a <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-26/business/29586449_1_foreclosure-sales-realtytrac-james-j-saccacio" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://articles.philly.com/2011-05-26/bu"><U><U>three years-supply</U></U></A></FONT> on the sluggish housing market. At the peak of the boom, total net home equity in the US (the value of owner occupied homes minus the remaining mortgage debt) stood at <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z"><U><U>13 trillion</U></U></A></FONT>. Today it is down to $6.5 trillion. America's home equity losses are greater than the GDP of Japan.</div> <bR> <div> This is not the first time the Dream has died, or at least been radically transformed. Historian Walter Russell Mead has <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/06/02/the-death-of-the-american-dream-i" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/w"><U><U>explained</U></U></A></FONT> that the ideal of the family farm was once even more deeply rooted in American life than the ideal of the owner-occupied home. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the average American family owned and farmed a small piece of land.  Cheap land on the frontier made the original American dream accessible to just about anybody. </div> <bR> <div> The old Dream died from a combination of reasons, most having to do with increases in agricultural efficiency and industrialization. In 1900 <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib"><U><U>41 percent</U></U></A></FONT> of Americans worked on farms. Today <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/extension.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.csrees.usda.gov/qlinks/extens"><U><U>fewer than 2 percent</U></U></A></FONT> do. </div> <bR> <div> This first Dream (“Dream 1.0”) was replaced by the “Dream” of big city life, availing oneself of the opportunities where the “future once happened.” For millions of Americans, from the late 1800s through the mid-1900s, the Dream was to move out of small town America to the big city. Similarly, for tens of millions of immigrants, the goal was simply moving to America, which most often meant moving to large urban centers. But “Dream 2.0” crumbled with the urban crisis of the1960s: racial strife, rising crime rates, bad schools, rising welfare rolls.  </div> <bR> <div> Dream 2.0 was replaced by the crown jewel of American prosperity: suburban home ownership (“Dream 3.0”), which -- despite what the pundits say -- won't die as inexorably as the other two. For one thing, this Dream is more universal than the family farm or the big city ever was. Roughly 69 percent of Americans currently own their own home. <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/index_files/SocietalTrendsStreetr.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/index_fil"><U><U>Polls</U></U></A></FONT> show suburban communities are where most people prefer to live, by wide margins. Throughout the country suburbs, where home ownership is most prominent, are growing. In the <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-new-york/what-the-u-s-census-tells-us-about-america-new-york-and-long-island" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-i"><U><U>New York</U></U></A></FONT> metro area, “exurban” suburban counties like Dutchess, Rockland, and Orange are growing faster than New York City and high density “inner ring” suburban counties like Nassau and Westchester. <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/index_files/SuburbsMustReads.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/index_fil"><U><U>Wendell</U></U></A></FONT> Cox has shown that 1.8 million folks who were 25-34 in 2000 moved to suburbs, while cities lost 1.3 million members of this same age group. Research conducted by <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.magid.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.magid.com/"><U><U>Frank N. Magid Associates</U></U></A></FONT> shows that 43 percent of Millennials describe suburbs as their “ideal place to live,” compared to just 31 percent of older generations. <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.newgeography.com/content/002371-the-shifting-geography-black-america" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.newgeography.com/content/0023"><U><U>Blacks</U></U></A></FONT> are becoming more suburban too, leaving big cities like Chicago, Boston, and New York in droves for suburban counties in the south and southwest. </div> <bR> <div> The gravy train of government-backed, debt-supported consumerism may have to change. We may have to alter our mindset, to live within our means, to refocus on the non-material things in life. Home ownership might change: people will rent for longer periods, more households will include grandparents or aunts and uncles, or accessory apartments, and more people will combine work space with living space. But in terms of the way we organize our physical space, there is no practical alternative to the suburbs. Certainly family farms and big cities have not proven viable for the vast majority of Americans. The American Dream 3.0 is here to stay.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_promises_of_god_are_our_foundation_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Promises of God are our Foundation </div> <div> Lisa Harper</div> <div> <A HREF="mailto:momtocam@gmail.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:momtocam@gmail.com"><U><U>momtocam@gmail.com</U></U></A></div> <div> <B> </B></div> <div> And if my people, upon whom my name has been pronounced, humble themselves and pray, and seek my presence and turn from their evil ways, I will hear them from heaven and pardon their sins and revive their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14</div> <bR> <div> Right now, we are witnessing a truly historic collapse of the economy, and yet most Americans do not understand what is going on. The standard of living of the average American has taken a tumble, and many are continuing to see their families budgets go south.</div> <bR> <div> The American dream of life getting better for each new generation feels like a myth to many of today's young adults. I am reminded of the movie Groundhog Day that brought us the reality of waking up and experiencing the same day over and over. I am feeling those thoughts more lately than I choose to count. After celebrating the July 4<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >th</FONT> holiday I couldn't help but reflect on how things in America have totally shifted from what our forefathers initiated so many years ago. Never in my generation did I ever fathom witnessing what we are hearing and seeing day to day with the economy.</div> <bR> <div> The U.S. economy was once the greatest economic machine in modern world history. It was truly a wonder to behold.  It worked so well that entire generations of Americans came to believe that America would enjoy boundless prosperity indefinitely. I worry that if things don't change for the better we will one day be celebrating “In Dependents Day” rather than Independence Day. Or maybe the 4<FONT SIZE="1" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >th</FONT> of July holiday will simply be erased off the calendar all together. I pray the latter does not occur.</div> <bR> <div> Recently I read many statistics on the alarming and negative changes that are taking place. The one that stuck out to me to the most was this one; the number of "low income jobs" in the U.S. has risen steadily over the past 30 years and they now account for 41 percent of all jobs in the United States. I can personally relate to this one since I returned to work last month. Though I am very grateful to be working again, the one element that bothers me is the older I get it seems I have less than ever before and that I am earning less money now than I was making ten years ago. Groceries and gas prices continue to rise, yet wages seem to be declining for many Americans. No matter what their work history and experience may be, one finds that they have to accept any job in order to keep a roof over their head. It has become a vicious cycle for millions. </div> <bR> <div> We have turned our backs on the principles of our forefathers and the principles of those that founded this nation. We have rejected the ancient wisdom that was handed down to us. It has been said that those that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind.  America is no longer standing on the principles of God but rather on a shaking pedestal of corruption. America is crumbling hard, yet no one is reaching out to God for help. Our President said he would give us change. The only thing I've seen change is our religious freedom; that has been, and it continues to be, taken away in so many areas of our life.</div> <bR> <div> A long time ago God made a covenant with Abraham. If Abraham would obey Him, God would bless Abraham with descendants who would number as the sands of the seashore. He also promised that in Abraham's seed the whole world would be blessed. God has blessed the people of this nation when they've called out to Him. He has protected America in times of war because of His promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It can only be hoped that He will, once more, show that mercy.</div> <bR> <div> In these times of worry, hardship, stress, and more, I will continue to keep the faith and put all of my trust in God. I am reminded each day of a quote from Ronald Reagan, "If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."</div> <bR> <div> God is faithful to guard His Word and will do that which He has said. We can count on Him for He is a shield to all who take refuge in Him.</div> <div> Psalm 18:29-39.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="obama_s_america_in_black___white"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Obama's America in Black & White</div> <div> Black political segregation, nurtured by the policies of the 1960s, has only hardened in the Obama years.</div> <div> By <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Seth%20Forman" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Seth%"><U>Seth Forman</U></A> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" >(<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A>)</FONT></div> <div> June 23, 2011</div> <div> <IMG SRC="45f01010.png" border=0 width="1" height="1" ALIGN="BOTTOM" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0"></div> <div> Platitudes about the civic utopia that would spring forth from the election of Barack Obama have vanished. Thomas Friedman's claim that “the American Civil War ended, as a black man . . . became president of the United States,” has now been replaced by<I> </I>PBS host Tavis Smiley's prediction that the 2012 presidential election is “going to be the ugliest, the nastiest, the most divisive, and the most racist in the history of this Republic.” E. J. Dionne's trope that “it is time to hope again. Time to hope that the era of racial backlash and wedge politics is over,” has given way to the statement by CBS's Bob Schieffer that recent criticism of Obama represents “an ugly strain of racism that's running through this whole thing.” Paul Krugman, who wrote in 2008 that “Racial polarization used to be a dominating force in our politics, but we're now a different, and better, country,” has taken to equating the anti-Obama Tea Party with the Ku Klux Klan.</div> <div> It's not just the punditry that overpredicted the soothing qualities of Obama's presidential salve. Average citizens have also been chastened. A Rasmussen <A HREF="http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story/62841/poll:_race_relations_worse_since_obama_elected.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story/628"><U><U>poll</U></U></A> in October of 2010 found that just 36 percent of voters said relations between blacks and whites were getting better, down from 62 percent in July of 2009. </div> <div> The experts can be forgiven their erroneous certitudes. They were enthralled by the historical significance of Obama's election and, at least for those on the left, genuinely proud of how thoroughly involved they were in bringing it about.</div> <div> Average citizens, too, should be given the benefit of the doubt. Most Americans are largely unaware of the important differences in political viewpoint between the races, and prefer to refrain from commenting publicly about such things.</div> <div> So it wasn't for them to point out what the pundits ignored: Obama is and always has been a hardened, bare-knuckled veteran of the culture wars, who not only pursues racial divisions among Americans for political gain but personifies the stark differences in political attitudes between whites and blacks. It was as obvious in 2008 as it is now that electing a man who describes a sermon containing the passage “white people's greed runs a world in need” as the formative moment in his spiritual life would guarantee a period of unusual social bitterness and resentment.</div> <div> And that is, in fact, where we are. A recent <A HREF="http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-06-20/news/fl-cpcol-race-economy-obama-page-062020110620_1_whites-blacks-race-relations" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2011-06"><U><U>study</U></U></A> by the Pew Charitable Trusts found that non-college-educated whites are the most alienated of racial groups. Only 44 percent of this demographic said they expected their economic situation to be better ten years from now, compared to two-thirds of minorities (and 55 percent of college-educated whites).</div> <div> The familiar clichés with their subtle innuendos featuring “angry white males” who suffer from economic “anxiety” have been trotted out to explain white disillusionment. “The sense of being eclipsed demographically is almost certainly compounding the white working class's fear of losing ground economically,” is how Ronald Brownstein of <A HREF="http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/20110531/pl_yblog_exclusive/why-the-white-working-class-is-alienated-pessimistic" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_exclusive/"><U><I><U>National Journal</U></I></U></A><I> </I>adroitly phrased it.</div> <div> But the perception of an irascible white working class seems more of a projection of what liberal elites themselves would feel if they lacked power and prestige than it is an accurate depiction of white attitudes. More likely, white attitudes are being shaped by the perception that the top people in government, led by President Obama, embody a vision for America that is at odds with their own. Specifically, Obama's efforts to broaden the role of the federal government through health-care reform, carbon capping, transfer payments, and profligate spending has amounted, in the words of Charles Krauthammer, to a redrawing of the American social compact, a recasting of “the relationship between government and citizen,” a sharp shift in power toward Washington, away from individuals and the free market.</div> <div> America's current social unease, in other words, stems from the feeling among large swaths of Americans that Obama's agenda poses a direct challenge to the American Dream: the idea, as one prominent writer recently <A HREF="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2011/06/03/the-death-of-the-american-dream-ii" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/w"><U><U>put</U></U></A> it, “that through hard work and good choices the average American can be prosperous and independent, and that ordinary people . . . can govern themselves wisely and well without the `guidance' of their `betters.'”</div> <div> The extent to which blacks remain alienated from this historical social compact is America's best-kept political secret. In the simplest terms, blacks tend to be more ambivalent toward the nation's founding documents, institutions, and values than whites, are more likely to prefer an activist government, and are more likely to look skeptically upon free-market competition, entrepreneurship, and individualism. Polls cited by Abigail and Stephan Thernstrom in their seminal work <A HREF="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=%200684844974" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/a"><U><I><U>America in Black and White</U></I></U></A> show a marked racial divide on such questions as the proper level of governmental assistance, whether the federal government should provide more services even if it means new taxes, and whether or not it is the responsibility of government to reduce income differences among people. </div> <bR> <div> In other words, even though the 2010 census reveals that residential segregation for blacks is at its <A HREF="http://diverseeducation.com/article/14541" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://diverseeducation.com/article/1454"><U><U>lowest</U></U></A> level ever (the average black lives in a community that is 54 percent nonblack), blacks remain the most politically segregated group. There is indeed no greater predictor of voting patterns than being black - not income, not education level, not marriage status, not age, not religious affiliation, not party affiliation, not profession. Once the voter is known to be black, it can be estimated with roughly 90 percent confidence that he will pull the lever for a Democrat. </div> <div> This is scandalously dehumanizing. Billions of dollars have been spent examining black isolation in residential housing, but almost nothing is said about the equally insidious clustering of blacks on the political left, or the origins of this tendency in degrading public-policy assumptions. Some time around 1965 - perhaps when Lyndon B. Johnson told Howard University's graduating class that America seeks “equality not just as a right or a theory, but equality as a fact and equality as a result” - America's political elites surrendered to the notion that racism was so determinative of black success that only a full cadre of special programs, legal exceptions, governmental assistance, and racial preferences could even partially compensate for it. Thus, a new social compact, crafted specifically for blacks and based on government benevolence, was born. “Told repeatedly that they have little chance to succeed in a racist world,” John McWhorter explains in his book <A HREF="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=%200060935936" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/a"><U><I><U>Losing the Race</U></I></U></A>, “blacks were and are ripe for collectivist ideas that promise them a better future.”</div> <div> A greater violation of the principles of free will and individual conscience could hardly be imagined. What other group of people is officially assumed by government to have had identical experiences or suffered the same debilitating social rejection? What other group must suffer leaders like Jesse Jackson, who <A HREF="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/68451-jackson-you-cant-vote-against-healthcare-and-call-yourself-a-black-man=" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/68451-"><U><U>told</U></U></A> a Congressional Black Caucus reception in 2009, “You can't vote against health care and call yourself a black man”?</div> <div> Two related results of this special dispensation for blacks have been that they continue to trail whites, Hispanics, and Asians in the rate at which they create new businesses, and that they are overrepresented in government employment. It is no coincidence that the nation's wealthiest majority-black suburb, Prince George's County in Maryland, is a bedroom community of Washington, D.C.; 41 percent of employed blacks living in Prince George's County work for the state, local, or federal government and another 10 percent work in the nonprofit sector.</div> <div> While careers in government service can be rewarding, there is an emotional price to pay for not participating in marketplace competition. In the 1990s, the psychologist Ellis Cose became a bestselling author <A HREF="http://www.npr.org/2011/05/31/136824394/the-end-of-anger-and-the-beginning-of-optimism" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.npr.org/2011/05/31/136824394/"><U><U>writing</U></U></A> about the “rage” of black professionals resulting from being typecast by their white peers. But if the economist Arthur Brooks is correct in maintaining that “<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/Index_files/AmericaFacesNewCultureWar.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/Index_fil"><U><U>earned success</U></U></A>” is critical to human happiness - that money corresponds to happiness only through the perceived creation of real “value” - then the black social compact has also played a role. Underrepresented in the most dynamic commercial sectors, stuck in slow-moving public bureaucracies, black professionals are more likely to lack the assurance one gains from the “earned success” of the marketplace, via the only objective measure of productive behavior: profitability.</div> <div> Many whites may now be experiencing their own version of black middle-class “rage.” Obama has, in a sense, nationalized the black social compact. In his first year in office he rammed two massive bills through Congress in a concerted effort to reorganize American life around the objectives of redistributing wealth, expanding the welfare state, and increasing government employment. One bill, the “economic stimulus” act (formally the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009), <A HREF="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/krugman-misleads-government-spending-economic-growth_508790.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/krug"><U><U>added $862 billion</U></U></A> to the federal budget, increased federal spending by 34 percent in a single year, pushed the public sector to almost 43 percent of the entire economy (up from 36.4 percent in 2008), and “<A HREF="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/where-did-the-stimulus-go" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/articl"><U><U>saved</U></U></A>” the jobs of roughly 900,000 state and local government employees at a time when the private sector lost 5.7 million jobs.</div> <div> Half of the stimulus grants to states went for Medicaid and other transfer programs. The result, <I>USA Today</I> reported in 2010, is that Americans depend more on government assistance now than at any other time in the nation's history: a record 18.3 percent of the nation's total personal income came in the form of payments from the government for Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, unemployment benefits, and other programs. By August of 2010 government anti-poverty programs served a record one in six Americans. This growth in the number of dependent people, it is important to note, has taken place before the second of Obama's two main legislative accomplishments - health-care reform - adds an estimated 16 million more to the Medicaid rolls, beginning in 2014. </div> <bR> <div> Not surprisingly, given the factors outlined above, blacks are far more comfortable with Obama's revised social compact than whites. Another Pew <A HREF="http://pewsocialtrends.org/2010/06/30/how-the-great-recession-has-changed-life-in-america/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://pewsocialtrends.org/2010/06/30/ho"><U><U>poll</U></U></A>, in May of 2010, found that blacks were nearly twice as likely as whites to call U.S. economic conditions “excellent” or “good” (25 percent to 13 percent). They were also significantly less likely than whites to say that the American economy was still in recession (45 percent to 57 percent). <A HREF="http://www.npr.org/2011/05/31/136824394/the-end-of-anger-and-the-beginning-of-optimism" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.npr.org/2011/05/31/136824394/"><U><U>Ellis Cose</U></U></A> has even reemerged, 17 years after decrying the “rage of a privileged class,” to declare “<A HREF="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=%200061998559" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/a"><U><U>the end of anger</U></U></A>.” “In many ways,” Cose writes, “African-Americans today have more faith in this country than their white counterparts.” </div> <div> Cose is, of course, right. Presidential job-approval polls by the Gallup organization have tracked two consistent trends in Obama's ratings: overall decline from the highs of the exuberant first three months after his inauguration and a widening racial gap between black and white Americans. By October of 2010, Obama's approval had dropped to a new low among whites (36 percent), but remained at 91 percent among blacks, a difference of more than 50 percentage points that has persisted ever since the end of the three-month honeymoon. </div> <div> Pundits who spoke of a post-racial America if Obama became president were ignoring the fact, laid out in his two autobiographies and evident throughout his career, that Obama himself embodies the ambivalence that many blacks feel toward the “American creed,” a set of beliefs and attitudes born from a revolution against state authority and centered on the ability of individuals to determine their own destiny.</div> <div> The result is that the country now seems to be teetering on the edge of race-based political partisanship. Unlike blacks, who are staunchly Democratic in their voting habits, whites have been far more evenly distributed between the major parties in their national voting preferences. They make up the vast majority of “swing” or “independent” voters, who lend the country its tone of moderation and centrism. Indeed, Obama carried almost half of them.</div> <div> But Obama's aggressive agenda for changing the vital structure of American life to reflect the more collectivist, less individualistic creed of the far Left has already triggered “white flight” from the Democratic Party. In the 2010 mid-term elections Republicans carried the white vote by a 23-percentage-point margin (60 to 37 percent). Democrats performed worse with whites than in any other congressional election since the Second World War. Black voters remained at 89 percent for Democrats.</div> <div> The Democratic Party could become even more dependent on racial minorities, as blacks continue to interpret the white turn against Obama as cruel racial rejection. Arrayed against the party of minorities will be the predominantly white Republican Party, completely bereft of blacks and increasingly heedless of their concerns. Rather than eliminating race as a significant issue in American politics, the Obama presidency appears to have rendered it the central cleavage in American life for years to come.</div> <div> <I>- Seth A. Forman teaches public policy at Stony Brook University and is the author of</I> <A HREF="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/amazon.p?j=%201609102312" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nationalreview.com/redirect/a"><U><U>American Obsession: Race and Conflict in the Age of Obama</U></U></A> (Booklocker 2011).</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="five_arguments_against_gay_marriage"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Five arguments against gay marriage: Society must brace for corrosive change</div> <div> By <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Seth%20Forman" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/authors/Seth%"><U>Seth Forman</U></A> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" >(<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A>)</FONT></div> <div> June 23, 2011</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+York" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/New+Yo"><U>New York State</U></A>, the media report with poorly disguised elation, is set to legally redefine marriage to include relationships between two same-sex adults.</div> <bR> <div> Before this happens, people of good conscience, supporters and opponents both, should at least be given the opportunity to consider the possible consequences. </div> <bR> <div> <B>1. Religious freedom</B>. Proponents of gay marriage think their view is the latest expression of enlightened humanitarianism. That means people who believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage may soon wind up on the wrong side of "enlightened" bigotry.</div> <bR> <div> A recent <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Newsday+Inc." TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Newsda"><U>Newsday</U></A> editorial said opponents "will be seen by future generations in much the same light as those who opposed school desegregation." Devout Catholics, Orthodox Jews and, ironically, the 70% of African-Americans who oppose gay marriage have become the new <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Ku+Klux+Klan" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Ku+Klu"><U>Ku Klux Klan</U></A>?</div> <bR> <div> Proponents of gay marriage insist that a "religious exemption" will be sufficient to protect the rights of faith-based traditionalists. Maybe, maybe not.</div> <bR> <div> <B>2. Rights of children</B>. Legal equality for gay marriage will mean there can be no discrimination in favor of heterosexual couples in any sphere, including adoption, custody and reproductive services. Social workers showing preference to heterosexual couples in foster care or adoption placement will lose their jobs or face lawsuits.</div> <bR> <div> More children living in gay homes means more children living lives absent a relationship with at least one biological parent. One needn't deny the existence of many wonderful gay or adoptive parents to acknowledge that this will result in some emotional pain and confusion.</div> <bR> <div> <B>3. Whither traditional marriage?</B> Gay marriage may, as its proponents insist, strengthen the ideal of marriage by offering the highest public acceptance only to those in committed relationships. </div> <bR> <div> But even gay activists admit they are seeking to change the marriage ideal. Eliminating the complementarity of the sexes in marriage changes its essence. It may be old-fashioned to believe women are still necessary to domesticate sexually predatory men. But most social arrangements in which men operate without attachment to women are deeply dysfunctional. Many gay advocates tacitly admit as much.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Andrew+Sullivan" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Andrew"><U>Andrew Sullivan</U></A>, in his book "Virtually Normal," writes that the need for "extramarital outlets" should be recognized by partners in a same-sex marriage, and that gays should not be constrained by a "single, moralistic model."</div> <bR> <div> <B>4. Education</B>. It is possible the social impact of gay marriage on heterosexual marriage will be negligible. But the changes it will bring to our schools make this unlikely. A <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/California" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Califo"><U>California</U></A> task force appointed in 2001 recommended all curriculums there be changed to include alternative sexual lifestyles. In 2006, a federal judge in <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Massachusetts" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Massac"><U>Massachusetts</U></A> ruled that schools have a duty to teach children that there's moral equivalency between homosexual and heterosexual relationships - and have no obligation to let parents opt their children out of such instruction.</div> <bR> <div> <B>5. Husbands</B>. Federal Judge <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Vaughn+Walker" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Vaughn"><U>Vaughn Walker</U></A>'s ruling in August on California's <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Proposition+8" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Propos"><U>Proposition 8</U></A> - that "gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage" - confirmed the view that marriage is foremost about sexual choice, not reproduction. Think there are too few marriageable males now?</div> <bR> <div> Ask sociologist <A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Orlando+Patterson" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Orland"><U>Orlando Patterson</U></A> what happens when men are no longer tied to marriage through child rearing. He attributes high out-of-wedlock birthrates among African-Americans to the history of slavery, job discrimination and the welfare state, all of which separated black men from the expectation of secure paternity.</div> <bR> <div> These are just a few examples of how putting gay unions on a legal par with heterosexual ones may radically alter our culture. We should not be deluded into believing that nothing will change.</div> <bR> <div> <I>Forman is author of "American Obsession: Race and Conflict in the </I><A HREF="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Barack+Obama" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Barack"><U><I>Age of Obama</I></U></A><I>."</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="thank_god_for_obama_s_broken_promises"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Thank God for Obama's Broken Promises</div> <div> <I>May 3rd, 2011</I></div> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >By </FONT><A HREF="http://opinion-forum.com/index/authors/seth-forman/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://opinion-forum.com/index/authors/s"><U><U>Seth Forman</U></U></A> (<A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A>)</div> <bR> <div> After campaigning for years on closing Guantanamo Bay military prison and secret overseas CIA prisons, and actually signing an order to do so in 2009, Obama abruptly reversed himself in March, 2011. Good thing, too.</div> <div> Follow the sequence of events.</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, August 2007, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_r"><U><U>Salon.com</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> As President, I will close Guantanamo, reject the Military Commissions Act and adhere to the Geneva Conventions. Our Constitution and our Uniform Code of Military Justice provide a framework for dealing with the terrorists.</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, November 16, 2008, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXZoM__vU0" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQXZoM__v"><U><U>60 Minutes</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> I have said repeatedly that I intend to close Guantanamo, and I will follow through on that.</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, January 22, 2009, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_r"><U><U>Salon.com</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> Just two days after taking office, Obama signs the executive order directing the military to close Guantanamo Bay by January 2010. Says Obama:</div> <div> “This is me following through on not just a commitment I made during the campaign, but I think an understanding that dates back to our founding fathers, that we are willing to observe core standards of conduct, not just when it's easy, but also when it's hard.”</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, January 23, 2009, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2472857.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2"><U><U>Australian Broadcasting Corporation</U></U></A></FONT><I>:</I></div> <div> Guantanamo will be closed no later than one year from now. … We can abide by a rule that says we don't torture.</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, May 2009, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_r"><U><U>Salon.com</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> By any measure, the costs of keeping it [Guantanamo] open far exceed the complications involved in closing it. That's why I argued that it should be closed throughout my campaign, and that is why I ordered it closed within one year.</div> <bR> <div> Barack Obama, January, 2010, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_r"><U><U>Salon.com</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> We will not be transferring additional detainees back to Yemen at this time. But make no mistake. We will close Guantanamo prison, which has damaged our national security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for Al Qaeda.</div> <bR> <div> March 2011, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/04/25/obama_guantanamo_rhetoric" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_r"><U><U>Salon.com</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> Obama signs an executive order to create a formal system of indefinite detention for the captives still kept at Guantanamo Bay. Releases statement through senior administration official: “The president does remain committed to closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay.”</div> <bR> <div> Osama bin Laden killed, May 1, 2011, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/osama-bin-laden-killed-in-us-raid-buried-at-sea/2011/05/02/AFx0yAZF_story.html?hpid=z1" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/o"><U><U>Washington Post</U></U></A></FONT>.</div> <bR> <div> May 2, 2011, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/world/asia/02reconstruct-capture-osama-bin-laden.html?sq=courier%20guantanomo%20bay&st=cse&adxnnl=1&scp=1&adxnnlx=1304355606-1qWMTC7JQcUc4PhwXm3b6Q" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/02/world/"><U><U>New York Times</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> The New York Times reports that a courier for Bin laden who led American intelligence to the terrorist leader was identified by Guantanamo Bay detainees.</div> <div> Detainees at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, had given the courier's pseudonym to American interrogators and said that the man was a protégé of <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/khalid_shaikh_mohammed/index.html?inline=nyt-per" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/"><U><U>Khalid Shaikh Mohammed</U></U></A></FONT>, the confessed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.</div> <bR> <div> May 2, 2011, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ikAZCh0ww4Y1tnn_VhV3j8H5GTEg" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/arti"><U><U>Associated Press</U></U></A></FONT>:</div> <div> Officials say CIA interrogators in secret overseas prisons developed the first strands of information that ultimately led to the killing of Osama bin Laden.</div> <bR> <div> Current and former U.S. officials say that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, provided the nom de guerre of one of bin Laden's most trusted aides. The CIA got similar information from Mohammed's successor, Abu Faraj al-Libi. Both were subjected to harsh interrogation tactics inside CIA prisons in Poland and Romania.</div> <div> Here's hoping that Obama indulges us in many more such policy reversals.</div> <bR> <div> <I>[Seth Forman is author of the forthcoming book American Obsession: Race and Conflict in the Age of Obama (Booklocker).]</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="donald_trump_scores_an_important"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Donald Trump scores an important victory . . . over the media</div> <div> By Seth Forman</div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Donald Trump is a shameless self-promoter. His prowess as a developer and businessman has been greatly exaggerated. He has crawled around in the muck and mire of what now passes for popular culture, and deserves at least some of the blame for tawdry's victory over grace in that sphere. He is an outsized egotist (about on a par with Obama) whose passion for self-congratulation is the only reliable thing we know about him. And that his future candidacy for president may soon be taken seriously owes to no one so much as it does Barack Obama, whose own candidacy seriously eroded the standards for presidential qualification.</div> <bR> <div> But Trump has achieved something important. His decision to focus like a laser on Obama's failure to produce a birth certificate has highlighted the absolute corruption of the American media on the subject of Obama, and the dangers of power granted in the absence of an unaligned press.  </div> <bR> <div> Given that Obama's primary claim to the presidency has been his compelling life story -- his biracialism, his international upbringing, especially the time he spent in Muslim lands -- the media has shown shockingly little interest in several pieces of information about Obama's life which might legitimately concern voters. Nowhere in his biographies, for example, does Obama mention his 1981 trip to Pakistan, where he stayed with influential political leaders from that country at a time when a State Department advisory warned U.S. citizens against travel to Pakistan.  There has also been a strange disinterest in Obama's 2006 trip to Kenya where, as a sitting U.S. senator, Obama criticized the incumbent government (a U.S. ally) and barnstormed with a Marxist candidate he supported. So too, there has been nary a peep among media elites over Obama's funding of the radical "education" work of bomb thrower Bill Ayers, or his own work on behalf of the activist group ACORN, the now defunct <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/1857-acorn-vote-fraud-and-prostitution" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/"><U><U>largest</U></U></A></FONT> purveyor of voter registration fraud in American history (and, apparently, an <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/1857-acorn-vote-fraud-and-prostitution" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/"><U><U>enabler</U></U></A></FONT> of under aged prostitution.). </div> <bR> <div> One of the functions of the media is to protect the public from fraudulent statements made by public figures. The unwillingness of the media to fulfill this role in the case of Obama has led to significant, and probably needless, public tension. Obama's resistance to releasing the long version of his birth certificate has served not only to raise legitimate speculation about the circumstances surrounding his birth, but to give fodder to anti-Obama extremists. </div> <bR> <div> Gail Collins, the <I>New York Times' </I>most reliably uninteresting liberal attack dog, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.newser.com/story/116002/donald-trump-vs-new-york-times-columnist-gail-collins-its-on.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.newser.com/story/116002/donal"><U><U>questioned</U></U></A></FONT> Trump's sanity just for raising the birth certificate issue. But would she say the same about famed black Vanderbilt University Law Professor and Obama supporter Carol Swain? Swain has said "I think that by not releasing it [the full birth certificate], it makes people much more passionately opposed to the president. Moreover, for a president who was elected on the basis of his personal background, it is troubling that Obama himself would want to withhold such basic information." </div> <bR> <div> The media's curiosity about the background of those running for national office seemed to know no bounds when it came to George W. Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard or the sexual behavior of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's daughter. But during and since the 2008 campaign a virtual wall of silence has been constructed around Obama. </div> <bR> <div> This has important implications for the country. Questions about Obama's family and his relationship to Islam, for example, and hence his world view, remain subjects of speculation. Former CIA officer Larry Johnson, for example, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/07/27/2nd-posting-the-obama-birth-certificate-controversy" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2009/07"><U><U>believes</U></U></A></FONT> that the full birth record from the State of Hawaii was probably amended in 1968 to show Obama was adopted by his step father, the Indonesian Muslim Lolo Soetoro, that he became formally known for a time as "Barry Soetoro," and may even have his religion listed as Muslim. This would completely change what Obama has said about his past and represent a public fraud of a very significant magnitude. </div> <bR> <div> At the very least the full record might help explain Obama's strange discomfort with exercising American power against radical Muslim regimes in Libya and elsewhere, where he has farmed out the defense of American interests to the United Nations, and his insistence on "dialogue" with rogue Muslim regimes in Syria and Iran. All of this while touting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Al Qaeda associated Muslim opposition groups in Libya as democracy craving freedom fighters. </div> <bR> <div> Some of the missing details of Obama's life are doubtlessly trivial. Obama probably has benign explanations for not providing more information about them. Even Trump admits that the evidence strongly suggests Obama was born in Hawaii and is an American citizen. But that Obama has not yet released this information, and that the media refuses to criticize him for not doing so, is a testament not to the insanity of the "birthers," but to Obama's penchant for secrecy, and the dangerous amount of latitude the media has been willing to cede him. </div> <bR> <div> <I>Seth Forman is author of American Obsession: Race and Conflict in the Age of Obama (forthcoming, Booklocker), and blogs at </I><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U><I><U>www.mrformansplanet.com</U></I></U></A></FONT><I>.</I></div> <bR> <div> <I>This column first appeared on </I><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/donald_trump_scores_an_importa.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/04/d"><U><I><U>American Thinker</U></I></U></A></FONT><I>.</I></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="a_flashback_in_time"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>A flashback in time</div> <div> By Lisa Harper</div> <bR> <div> A few days ago I was watching television and was reminded of how quickly time has passed. The news segment was reflecting on the 30-year anniversary of former President Reagan's attempted assassination. (By the way, Reagan remains to this day my favorite President and I remember distinctly the day I left work early to watch his funeral on live television.) Clearly, I thought, where has the time gone? It began a stir of emotions and memories, and I began to reflect on days gone by. I began looking back at an era that has become a favorite not only of my past, but of other people's as well.</div> <bR> <div> The time that I find myself thinking about, more often than not, is the 1970's. Growing up in the 70's was great fun. It was the age where video games were in their infancy, Big Wheels were the rage and your imagination went wild from movies like Star Wars and Jaws. I also remember the simple feat of being able to transform a black and white television into an interactive game. No computers then, remember?</div> <div>  </div> <div> Our virtual reality games weren't played on the TV or on a computer, however. They were played in the backyard and throughout the neighborhood. There were no worries about running out of memory, losing memory cards, tripping over the cord and unplugging your game console or seeing your game freeze. The biggest interruption we had to worry about was when our Moms called us home to do our homework and to eat supper because the sun was beginning to set. Our exploration suddenly came to an end. Yet we knew that soon enough it would come back; the next day we could begin our adventures anew.</div> <div>  </div> <div> Bellbottoms, sideburns, Oil Crisis, Lava Lamps, Mood Rings, M*A*S*H, Three Mile Island, the mental list compiles the many events, fads, and the array of music that came our way during the 1970s. Most importantly, the Internet was developed by the Department of Defense. The Internet was originally intended for military use only, but it would forever change how people communicate and obtain information. A “Network of Networks”… as I like to call it.</div> <bR> <div> Trends of all kinds seem to change. Political leaders change, governments change, things come and go. Clothing styles, food trends, our bodies change, and people change. And we often see these changes and trends repeated.</div> <div>  </div> <div> In the midst of our ever-changing world, it is a real comfort to me to know that we have a never-changing God. Even though everything around us seems to change God says “I never change”. He is the One who has all we need<B>. </B>Malachi 3:6 reads, "For I am the Lord, I do not change.” His love and mercy for us never changes. His goodness never changes. His ability to provide and meet needs never changes. His holiness, His justice, the list could go on and on.</div> <div>  </div> <div> Next time you get discouraged, stop and think for a moment. No matter what else changes around you, God in all His greatness and might and majesty will never change. In an ever-changing world, He is a never-changing God, fulfilling the promise in Hebrews 13:8, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever."</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="charlie_sheen_s_lunacy_is_no_recent"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Charlie Sheen's lunacy is no recent development</div> <div> By Seth Forman</div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></U></A></div> <bR> <div> I've been trying to avoid the Charlie Sheen issue, but I'm too bothered by the media's turpitude to keep silent. Does anyone writing for a mainstream news agency realize that in 2006 Charlie Sheen appeared on the popular <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/170406mediacomplicit.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/apr"><U><U>Jimmy Kimmel Live</U></U></A></FONT> show to accuse President Bush and the U.S. government of carrying out and covering up the terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center towers in 2001? You wouldn't know it from reading recent reports or from watching Dateline NBC's hour-long show on Sheen's emotional decline. Since 2006, Sheen has recorded videos and written letters clarifying his position on this issue, even drafting a <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://entertainment.gaeatimes.com/2009/09/09/sheen-writes-to-obama-over-911-32097" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://entertainment.gaeatimes.com/2009/"><U><U>letter</U></U></A></FONT> to Obama in 2009 asking for an investigation into the “Bush cover up.” Sheen has claimed that the government used the 9/11 attacks “as the pretext for the systematic dismantling of our Constitution and Bill of Rights”; that the administration of former president George W. Bush was behind the attacks, which they were then able to use to justify an invasion of Iraq; and that Osama Bin Laden was working with the CIA up until 9/11. Sheen, in short, joined the maniacal “9/11 Truther” movement, explaining in his letter to president Obama that “We cannot allow governments to continue to advance their political agendas by exploiting forged pretexts.” </div> <bR> <div> Needless to say, this story received very little attention in the United States media. It appeared nowhere near the front pages of the <I>New York Times, Washington Post, </I>or <I>Wall Street Journal, </I>and where it did appear, it was buried. One hopes this is for the very good reason that it doesn't matter what Hollywood wackos say about anything, especially politics. More likely, its absence from the front pages reflects the media not wanting to draw attention to a view point that they see as just slightly off the mark, a wee bit too extreme in its invocation of “conspiracy” to be taken seriously, but nevertheless on the right track. Liberals, in fact, have great sympathy for any narrative in which the 9/11 attacks are seen as, in some grand way, America's fault, and as the gateway to the militarily aggressive, anti-terror policies of the Bush administration. Remember, the media didn't report when “9/11 Truther” Van Jones was appointed to the powerful government post of <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/03/wonderful-green-jobs-czar-van-jones-is-a-truther" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/03/wo"><U><U>“Green Jobs Czar”</U></U></A></FONT> by Obama. For the mainstream media, this just wasn't something they thought the United States public would want to know about a government official. It was left to “right-wing wacko” Glen Beck to scoop the media on the Van Jones story, after which the Czar was forced to <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/03/wonderful-green-jobs-czar-van-jones-is-a-truther" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/03/wo"><U><U>resign</U></U></A></FONT>. If not for Beck, Jones would today be handing out carbon emission waivers to companies he'd been able to shake down.</div> <bR> <div> So the media's faux fascination with the craziness of Charlie Sheen is contrived. There was quite a bit of evidence that Charlie Sheen was a mad man before his recent, drug-induced mental breakdown. But the media was uninterested when the madness included the vocalization of a view point that could only damage a cause they deem vital: the continuing demonization of George W. Bush.</div> <bR> <div> Even so, last week, when <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032600" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032600"><U><U>Dateline NBC</U></U></A></FONT> visited with Sheen for a whole week, when they supposedly gave tens of millions of viewers the inside scoop on all that is Charlie Sheen, when they scrupulously waded through his life and career and slow descent into madness, nowhere did Sheen's involvement with the “Truthers” appear. For the producers of Dateline, the belief that America attacked itself on 9/11 doesn't tell you anything about a person's character that's worth reporting.</div> <bR> <div> Seth Forman is the author of several books and a Research Associate Professor of public policy at Stony Brook University. Visit him at <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.mrformansplanet.com/"><U><U>http://www.mrformansplanet.com</U></U></A></FONT>.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div> <I>Note: The following column addresses issues local to Gastonia, NC. However, the underlying attitudes the writer explores are at work in governments across the country, from your local municipality or county right up to the federal level.</I></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="sustainable_development_robs_property"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Sustainable development robs property rights</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>My Tea Party Chronicle</U></A></div> <bR> <div> The Carolina Thread Trail is but one arm of a larger group of nonprofit organizations that are systematically working with governments at all levels to gain control over private property. The "trail" of tax laws, money, anti-private property initiatives, and conspirators is long and convoluted. I hope to try to explain this tangled web of central planning and deceit as concisely as possible. However, if you are seriously interested in knowing how and why this intricate web of land grabbing has taken hold in America, you may research websites by searching terms such as: Agenda 21, history of Sustainable Development, history of the President's Council on Sustainable Development, the Wildlands Project, and many more. If you would like to know more on this, please contact me.</div> <bR> <div> Briefly, Agenda 21, which debuted in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit, is a United Nations action plan for worldwide environment and development. It is a comprehensive blueprint for actions to be taken globally, nationally, and locally by governments and organizations connected to the United Nations in every area where "humans affect the environment." (Funny, I can't think of a human life that does not have any affect on the environment, so that pretty much covers every living, breathing human being on the planet.) The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Division for Sustainable Development created Agenda 21 with someone called Maurice Strong as the primary author. (Please research Maurice Strong, also.) Because Agenda 21 is an anti-private property rights agenda and would likely bring about resistance from Constitutional. freedom-loving Americans, the initiatives now carry lots of utopian sounding names such as: Smart Growth, Sustainable Development, Lands Conservancies, Greenways, Livable Communities, etc.</div> <bR> <div> In 1992 the first President Bush signed onto the Rio Summit Environmental Treaty, incorporating Agenda 21, but our Congress never ratified that treaty. Not dissuaded by the power of Congress, the next President, Bill Clinton, decided to implement Agenda 21 by executive order, creating "The President's Council on Sustainable Development."  "Sustainable Development" is the core philosophy of the Carolina Thread Trail and the Lands Conservancy, and the plethora of non-profit land taking organizations all over the country.  This Presidential Council created the federal use of tax credits to implement Agenda 21 in America.</div> <bR> <div> As the issue of eminent domain use for the Carolina Thread Trail came up recently, I conferred with several local people, commissioners and other interested parties, only to find out that few people are aware of the origins of "Sustainable Development" in America. The problematic issues with Sustainable Development and the Thread Trail are larger and farther reaching than just the eminent domain issue.  Most have never heard of Agenda 21. Yet our daily lives are now impacted by decisions initiated by the United Nations that we, as citizens, have never voted into place. These decisions have been put into action by cooperation between levels of governments, non-governmental organizations (NGO's), non-profit organizations, and central planners. Local policy statements, such as Gastonia 2020, and local planning boards have adopted land use restrictions based on the United Nations' plan called Agenda 21. Groups such as the Carolina Thread Trail and the Lands Conservancy have been established to operate the initiatives of Agenda 21 by using tax subsidies to support them. There are now, at the latest count, over 1700 nonprofit lands conservancy groups operating within the United States.  (In 1950 there were fewer than 50) At this writing, well over 4o% of all land in the United States is held by the Federal, State, and local governments, not including the restricted use lands in the conservancies and trusts.</div> <bR> <div> Mr. Cable, the executive director of the Catawba Lands Conservancy, proudly points out that an area the size of Connecticut carved out of 15 counties is planned for the Carolina Thread Trail.  Connecticut comprises 4,845 square miles.  If you were to superimpose that amount of land onto our local area for instance, that would be an area from Charlotte across to Shelby and from the South Carolina border north to the Virginia border vertically.  North Carolina has 48,000 square miles.  So, a swath of at least 10% of the entire state, as an example of size, would be "restricted use" controlled by the Carolina Thread Trail alone.  The Carolina Thread Trail is planned in North and South Carolina. (This does not include the areas already controlled by federal, state, and local governments, the Lands Conservancy, the Land Trust Alliance, and all of the other non-profits who are in the business of restricting land use in our State.)  I might ask the question, “How much is enough?”</div> <bR> <div> The Carolina Thread Trail organization and all of the Conservancy non-profits boast that conservation increases property values.  This is a "maybe so, maybe not," argument. Conservation easements lower property values for property tax purposes.  Land that is undeveloped has a lesser tax value than developed land. This means that localities will be increasing taxes on the rest of the population to make up the tax losses created by the conservation easements.  This is a socialist redistribution policy where the rest of the population pays to support the tax breaks to landowners who are "contributing" their land to a "restricted use" contract in perpetuity. The opposite argument of the decrease in tax value is, as Mr. Cable states, the idea that conservancies increase property values.  The simple explanation of this is that taking land out of use, or “restricting” use, by owners or future buyers, creates a scarcity of land.  When you create a scarcity of any particular necessary thing, the price goes up.  When land prices go up, the poor and the middle class have fewer opportunities to buy and use the land for their own needs.  So Mr. Cable has a point that conservancies increase property values with regard to market prices.  That can be a bad thing for future buyers and dampen the market severely. The land taken out of ownership use is, for all historical purposes, is now restricted forever by feudal landlords made up of non-profits and governments. </div> <bR> <div> As for the word, "voluntary, that Mr. Cable keeps pointing out as one of the selling points of the Thread Trail, I would like to point out that the tax consequences of the taking of the lands is not voluntary on the part of the rest of the local population.  As our taxes rise to support the taking of these lands, we are not voluntarily agreeing to support the landowners who are getting the tax breaks. Local government officials are making those decisions without referendum.  The last referendum on the subject, in Gastonia, was rejected by the voters. </div> <bR> <div> It is not surprising that some landowners want to take advantage of tax breaks.  What is unconscionable is that our leadership is promoting this socialistic policy without public and press scrutiny and loud opposition.  The decisions to create these policies are not in the interest of individual taxpayers or the public's knowledge of the consequences.   In fact, the public generally has no knowledge of Agenda 21 or the Sustainable Development origins.  Instead, the public is being fed a clever Madison Avenue sales pitch on "saving the environment," when in fact, what is happening is a transfer of property and wealth to a privileged few on a ruse of "saving the environment." In reality, citizens are being forced to support Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 without consent or knowledge.</div> <bR> <div> Resources:</div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_21_coming_to_a_neigh.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/u"><U><U>http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_agenda_21_coming_to_a_neigh.html</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21"><U><U>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agenda_21</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://sovereignty.net/p/sd/agenda21rpt.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://sovereignty.net/p/sd/agenda21rpt."><U><U>http://sovereignty.net/p/sd/agenda21rpt.htm</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011022312907/life-and-science/energy-and-environment/agenda-21-part-iii-maryland-county-abolishes-agenda-21-now-for-the-rest-of-the-country.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.rightsidenews.com/20110223129"><U><U>http://www.rightsidenews.com/2011022312907/life-and-science/energy-and-environment/agenda-21-part-iii-maryland-county-abolishes-agenda-21-now-for-the-rest-of-the-country.html</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.vimeo.com/8821807" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.vimeo.com/8821807"><U><U>http://www.vimeo.com/8821807</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=history+of+the+President%27s+Council+on+Sustainable+Development&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=#q=history+of+the+President%27s+Council+on+Sustainable+Development&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=tl:1,tl_num:20&prmd=ivns&ei=jGRyTajcC" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&h"><U><U>http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=history+of+the+President%27s+Council+on+Sustainable+Development&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq= - q=history+of+the+President%27s+Council+on+Sustainable+Development&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=tl:1,tl_num:20&prmd=ivns&ei=jGRyTaj</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.redstate.com/barleycorn/2011/02/11/conservation-easements-the-evil-no-one-knows-cares-about/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.redstate.com/barleycorn/2011/"><U><U>http://www.redstate.com/barleycorn/2011/02/11/conservation-easements-the-evil-no-one-knows-cares-about/</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_trust" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_trust"><U><U>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_trust</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=history+of+land+conservancy+trusts+in+the+U.S.&aq=f&aqi=m1&aql=&oq=#q=history+of+land+conservancy+trusts+in+the+U.S.&hl=en&sa=X&tbs=tl:1,tll:1940,tlh:1959&prmd=ivns&ei=_JtyTZnDLozrgQe2rJj-Cg&ved=0CGwQy" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&h"><U><U>http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&=&q=history+of+land+conservancy+trusts+in+the+U.S.&aq=f&aqi=m1&aql=&oq= -</U></U></A><FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" > </FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.catawbalands.org/your-land-trust/conservation-vision-2030/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.catawbalands.org/your-land-tr"><U><U>http://www.catawbalands.org/your-land-trust/conservation-vision-2030/</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.sheelahclarkson.com/land/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.sheelahclarkson.com/land/"><U><U>http://www.sheelahclarkson.com/land/</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://www.onencnaturally.org/pages/ConservationTaxCredit.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.onencnaturally.org/pages/Cons"><U><U>http://www.onencnaturally.org/pages/ConservationTaxCredit.html</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="eminent_domain_for_what_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Eminent Domain for What?</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</div> <bR> <div> If someone told you that some or all of the property you own could be confiscated against your will for a common area, an open area, a walking or biking trail, what would you say? You search for and find that perfect property to buy, only to find out that a 10 or 20 foot swath of that property next to a creek or stream is required greenway? Would you still want to buy it?  Let's say you bought a piece of land for the scenery, the quiet solitude, and the privacy. Should government force you to relinquish your land for the sake of recreational common access?  Maybe we should ask Mayor Stultz. (Note: Jeannie Stultz is the Democrat Mayor of Gastonia, NC.)</div> <bR> <div> While environmentalist conservation groups avow that they have no "eminent domain" powers, they create partnerships with local governments in order to use those governments to do the dirty work for them. Greenway websites emphasize that all land acquisitions are "voluntary." As we have seen recently in Gastonia, that is not exactly the truth with regard to the recent greenway project. </div> <bR> <div> Eminent Domain is a property-taking law originally devised for the government to take land for critical infrastructure such as roads and utilities, or to provide service to the population surrounding the property in question. Environmentalists have convinced politicians that they have the power and right to take privately owned property for “public benefit” by means of eminent domain on the basis of walkways, biking trails, and the vague definition of "open areas."  </div> <bR> <div> Greenways' websites promote all kinds of utopian benefits through restricting land use, creating open areas, and building walking and biking trails. They even call greenways "alternative transportation" to get grants from the State and Federal Departments of Transportation. Do you wonder where our transportation money is going? </div> <bR> <div> The operating capital for these groups is government grants and tax-deductible donations. This means governments are giving tax dollar grants to organizations with which the governments are partnering, while at the same time governments are handing out tax deductions to donors who give land or money to the greenways, trails, and conservancy organizations in order to encourage people to fund the taking of property. Cleverly, the money trail is the real trail being created under the guise of greenways. The conservancy foundations are not working for free. The more government grants and tax deductible donations they get, the fatter their salaries and bank accounts grow. </div> <bR> <div> Recently I found a published plan on the City of Gastonia website. It is at cityofgastonia.com or you can Google search "Gastonia 2020 Plan for Our Future." The plan states our government should "Encourage the <I>protection</I> of land through foundations and land trusts." It states our local government is to "partner with land conservancies and other public and nonprofit environmental agencies." What would be the purpose of such partnerships? Would those "partnerships" involve tax-funded grants for the taking of private property? In this instance, the word <I>"protection" </I>means "restricted use."</div> <div> Historically, the “mob” always demanded <I>"protection"</I> money, too.  What a coincidence!  Did you vote to have our government partner with land trusts and conservancies to "protect”……oops, I mean “restrict” land use?  If you did, was it your own land or land belonging to someone else you wish to restrict? Did you vote for a plan allowing our local government to take land by eminent domain for a greenway or a bike trail? You didn't? Neither did I. </div> <bR> <div> Instead of encouraging private land ownership and industries, our local government wants you to believe that by partnering with anti-private property rights groups, restricting land ownership, we will create some desirable location attracting businesses and lots of industrious, educated people. What industrious and educated persons want to buy or own a piece of land that could be taken or restricted at any whim of the local government for any reason whatsoever such as greenways?  I think there is an oxymoron in there somewhere.  Should we ask Mayor Stultz about that, too? </div> <bR> <div> Our County Commissioners are deliberating the threat of eminent domain for the Carolina Thread Trail on Thursday, February 24. You can show your support for our guaranteed Constitutional property rights by contacting them and telling them you are against the use of eminent domain for any such purposes as greenways, trails, and open areas. </div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_ghost_of_thanksgiving_yet_to_come"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Ghost of Thanksgiving Yet to Come</div> <div> Anonymous</div> <div> (Submitted by Wilson Forbes, Jr.)</div> <div>  </div> <div> "Winston, come into the dining room, it's time to eat," Julia yelled to her husband. "In a minute, honey, it's a tie score," he answered. Actually, Winston wasn't very interested in the traditional holiday football game between Detroit and Washington. Ever since the government passed the Civility in Sports Statute of 2017, outlawing tackle football for its "unseemly violence" and the "bad example it sets for the rest of the world," Winston was far less of a football fan than he used to be. Two-hand touch wasn't nearly as exciting.</div> <bR> <div> Yet it wasn't the game that Winston was uninterested in. It was more the thought of eating another Tofu Turkey. Even though it was the best type of Veggie Meat available after the government revised the American Anti-Obesity Act of 2018, adding fowl to the list of federally-forbidden foods, (which already included potatoes, cranberry sauce and mince-meat pie), it wasn't anything like real turkey. And ever since the government officially changed the name of "Thanksgiving Day" to "A National Day of Atonement" in 2020 to officially acknowledge the Pilgrims' historically brutal treatment of Native Americans, the holiday had lost a lot of its luster.</div> <bR> <div> Eating in the dining room was also a bit daunting. The unearthly gleam of government-mandated fluorescent light bulbs made the Tofu Turkey look even weirder than it actually was, and the room was always cold. Ever since Congress passed the Power Conservation Act of 2016, mandating all thermostats-which were monitored and controlled by the electric company-be kept at 68 degrees, every room on the north side of the house was barely tolerable throughout the entire winter.</div> <bR> <div> Still, it was good getting together with family. Or at least most of the family. Winston missed his mother, who passed on in October, when she had used up her legal allotment of live-saving medical treatment. He had had many heated conversations with the Regional Health Consortium, spawned when the private insurance market finally went bankrupt, and everyone was forced into the government health care program. And though he demanded she be kept on her treatment, it was a futile effort. "The RHC's resources are limited," explained the government bureaucrat Winston spoke with on the phone. "Your mother received all the benefits to which she was entitled. I'm sorry for your loss."</div> <bR> <div> Ed couldn't make it either. He had forgotten to plug in his electric car last night, the only kind available after the Anti-Fossil Fuel Bill of 2021 outlawed the use of the combustion engines - for everyone but government officials. The fifty mile round trip was about ten miles too far, and Ed didn't want to spend a frosty night on the road somewhere between here and there.</div> <bR> <div> Thankfully, Winston's brother, John, and his wife were flying in. Winston made sure that the dining room chairs had extra cushions for the occasion. No one complained more than John about the pain of sitting down so soon after the government-mandated cavity searches at airports, which severely aggravated his hemorrhoids. Ever since a terrorist successfully smuggled a cavity bomb onto a jetliner, the TSA told Americans the added "inconvenience" was an "absolute necessity" in order to stay "one step ahead of the terrorists." Winston's own body had grown accustomed to such probing ever since the government expanded their scope to just about anywhere a crowd gathered, via Anti-Profiling Act of 2022. That law made it a crime to single out any group or individual for "unequal scrutiny," even when probable cause was involved. Thus, cavity searches at malls, train stations, bus depots, etc., etc., had become almost routine. Almost.</div> <bR> <div> The Supreme Court is reviewing the statute, but most Americans expect a Court composed of six progressives and three conservatives to leave the law intact.  "A living Constitution is extremely flexible," said the Court's eldest member, Elena Kagan." Europe has had laws like this one for years. We should learn from their example," she added..</div> <bR> <div> Winston's thoughts turned to his own children. He got along fairly well with his 12-year-old daughter, Brittany, mostly because she ignored him. Winston had long ago surrendered to the idea that she could text anyone at any time, even during Atonement Dinner. Their only real confrontation had occurred when he limited her to 50,000 texts a month, explaining that was all he could afford. She whined for a week, but got over it.</div> <bR> <div> His 16-year-old son, Jason, was another matter altogether. Perhaps it was the constant bombarding he got in public school that global warming, the bird flu, terrorism, or any of a number of other calamities were "just around the corner," but Jason had developed a kind of nihilistic attitude that ranged between simmering surliness and outright hostility. It didn't help that Jason had reported his father to the police for smoking a cigarette in the house, an act made criminal by the Smoking Control Statute of 2018, which outlawed smoking anywhere within 500 feet of another human being. Winston paid the $5,000 fine, which might have been considered excessive before the American dollar became virtually worthless as a result of QE13. The latest round of quantitative easing the federal government initiated was, once again, to "spur economic growth." This time they promised to push unemployment below its years-long rate of 18%, but Winston was not  particularly  hopeful.</div> <bR> <div> Yet the family had a lot for which to be thankful, Winston thought, before remembering it was a Day of Atonement. At least he had his memories. He felt a twinge of sadness when he realized his children would never know what life was like in the Good Old Days, long before government promises to make life "fair for everyone" realized their full potential. Winston, like so many of his fellow Americans, never realized how much things could change when they didn't happen all at once, but little by little, so people could get used to them.</div> <bR> <div> He wondered what might have happened if the public had stood up while there was still time, maybe back around 2010, when all the real nonsense began. "Maybe we wouldn't be where we are today if we'd just said 'enough is enough' when we had the chance," he thought.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="gastonia_s_tax_and_spend_regime"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Gastonia's Tax and Spend Regime</div> <div> By Jim Pass, Gastonia, NC</div> <bR> <div> The voters have voted against the convention center ~ they're going to build it anyway.  Look at the City Council agenda to see what this thing is going to cost us in management fees and expenses every year!  These will be your tax dollars, folks!</div> <bR> <div> The voters have voiced their opinions against higher taxes and fees ~ they're raising them anyway. The voters have voted against wasteful public spending ~ they're spending anyway. Voters have had no recourse in the usurpation of private property by the means of eminent domain to designate “greenways.”</div> <bR> <div> We pay taxes that are supposed to include trash pick-up services ~ they're planning to add a “user” fee ~ another word for tax! Real estate values have shrunk ~ they keep the higher values on the books to maintain the tax revenue stream!</div> <bR> <div> Gastonia and Gaston County have some of the highest tax rates in the State of North Carolina, and yet these same local governments lament the fact that they cannot attract potential tax-revenue-producing businesses to locate to our city/county. I wonder why?   Most business people that I know will not knowingly put themselves or their businesses into a situation where it costs more to produce goods, and therefore increase the price they have to charge for those goods to their consumers who buy them!  It ain't rocket science folks; it's pure economics.  </div> <bR> <div> Why should business owners expose themselves and their employees to higher taxes and higher costs of living?  Just to be in beautiful Gastonia/Gaston County?  It simply does not make good economic sense!  Instead, our local governments have initiated a policy of “If we build it, they will come.”  Right out of a movie script!  Now there's the ultimate reliable authority!  And so, based on this seemingly unimpeachable truth, our local governments continue to tax and spend!  Simultaneously, they're increasing their real estate holdings ~ all purchased with tax dollars! </div> <bR> <div> There's an old story about a farmer who was having trouble getting his recalcitrant mule to pull his plow.  After repeated failures to coax the mule into action, he picked up a two-by-four and thumped the mule right between his eyes, just to get his attention to the task at hand.  Problem solved!  Therefore, I think it's time to metaphorically thump a few heads in our local governments, just to get their attention to the task at hand ~ the reduction of government spending in order to live within their revenues. We need to remind them that they work for us; we don't work for them!  They are public servants, not public masters!</div> <bR> <div> According to the U.S. Declaration of Independence, when a government is not responsive to the will of the people, it is the sovereign right and duty of the people to remove it.  </div> <bR> <div> That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, <U>deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,</U> - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their <U>right</U>, it is their <U>duty</U>, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.</div> <bR> <div> Translated, that means that when the next election comes around in Gastonia, it'll be time to remove the members of the governing bodies ~ the mayor, the city council, the city manager, and all of their cronies who continue on in this mindless path of taxation and spending without regard to the wishes of the people or economic common sense.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="greenways___the_paths_to_government"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Greenways - The Paths to Government Power Over Your Property</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> 1-5-11</div> <bR> <div> Yesterday, upon hearing that our local city council was about to use eminent domain to condemn private property for the sake of a greenway, I emailed each council member to implore them against the action.  This morning's newspaper informs me that they went ahead with the eminent domain grab and took swaths of land for their beloved greenway.  Six council members, three for the grab, three against, the mayor broke the tie and took the land.  </div> <bR> <div> The newspaper article says this: "Plans are to hook the greenway into the Catawba Lands Conservancy's conceptual Carolina Thread Trail, a 15-county network of walking and biking paths in the Charlotte region. Arthurs (the attorney for the property owners) pointed out that past discussions of building that network have referenced respecting landowners by building around them if they don't wish to participate.</div> <bR> <div> But Smith, the city attorney, pointed to the conservancy's mission statement, which states "any decision to exercise eminent domain is at the discretion of the governing body" where the land lies."</div> <bR> <div> In other words, when the greenway was proposed, the council pushed the greenway project by saying they would not use eminent domain and would respect private ownership.  Lo and behold, the greenway conservancy group, whoever that is, has a mission statement to the contrary.  The lessons?  Be careful with whom you jump into bed and don't listen to liars in powerful positions.</div> <bR> <div> The attorney for the property owners said, "My clients will still pay taxes on this property and will be liable if someone gets hurt," he said. "There's no way to protect them from that with just a simple condemnation."</div> <bR> <div> So the property owners now own a piece of condemned land on which they pay taxes and property insurance yet they have no use of and no control over?  How does that work?  I am also wondering what just happened to the property values should the owners decide they want to sell their land.  How does the City condemn land, take it, and then make those who just lost their property pay taxes on it and cause them liability?   </div> <bR> <div> Read Full Article Here <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.gastongazette.com/news/best-54003-city-lake.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.gastongazette.com/news/best-5"><U><U>http://www.gastongazette.com/news/best-54003-city-lake.html</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> You might be sitting there thinking, "Big deal."  You might be thinking greenways are so cool.  Greenways are for hiking, biking, and commiserating with nature.  You might be thinking Americans are so fat that we need to take away land from private ownership so we have places to run off the extra flab.  "It's for the public good,” you say.  Say what?</div> <bR> <div> The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says this:</div> <bR> <div> No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.</div> <bR> <div> To get around this, our local council offered some pittance to the property owners who refused the offer, saying they wanted their land to remain as a buffer to their property and did not want any pedestrian traffic or a greenway on their land.  The council, in effect, has come back to say, "Up yours."  "We'll do what we want and you can go fly a kite."  Now they have taken the land without just compensation and waltz off to congratulate themselves on the coup.  </div> <bR> <div> The greenway organizations say they have no power to use eminent domain to take the land.  Instead, they are relying on your local government officials to use eminent domain, and then they pressure the local governments to do just that. (Take names and vote those s.o.b.s out of your local government)</div> <bR> <div> Mind you, the owners of this land were not planning some dastardly development on the property.  They were not planning high density destruction of the area.  In fact, they only wanted to keep the land they owned for the purpose of owning it and using it as a buffer of protection for their property.  And, after all, they are paying the taxes and insurance on that land.</div> <bR> <div> Now you might be saying, "Well, this is just some little town in North Carolina and has no effect on the big picture of the world."  If that's what you are thinking, you don't know the extent and reach of “lands conservancy" groups who have descended on every square inch of the country like a plague of locusts.  Just four areas below:</div> <bR> <div> Pocatello, Idaho <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/local/article_6f609db2-a80b-11df-9a0f-001cc4c002e0.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/lo"><U><U>http://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/local/article_6f609db2-a80b-11df-9a0f-001cc4c002e0.html</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Philadelphia, PA <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer/the_intelligencer_news_details/article/27/2010/october/26/township-ready-to-seize-land-for-open-space.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/th"><U><U>http://www.phillyburbs.com/news/local/the_intelligencer/the_intelligencer_news_details/article/27/2010/october/26/township-ready-to-seize-land-for-open-space.html</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Barrington, IL <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://triblocal.com/barrington/2010/02/10/penny-road-pub-owner-fears-fight-will-end-up-closing-business/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://triblocal.com/barrington/2010/02/"><U><U>http://triblocal.com/barrington/2010/02/10/penny-road-pub-owner-fears-fight-will-end-up-closing-business/</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Albany, NY <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://pressrepublican.com/0100_news/x1048513983/Land-rights-legal-group-targets-Adirondacks" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://pressrepublican.com/0100_news/x10"><U><U>http://pressrepublican.com/0100_news/x1048513983/Land-rights-legal-group-targets-Adirondacks</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Comprehensive Article on Greenway Abuse of Property Rights <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/redlight-for-greenways/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/"><U><U>http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/redlight-for-greenways/</U></U></A></FONT></div> <bR> <div> Excerpt: "When property is appropriated for “public use” (whether for public access or buffer zones to preserve views), landowners are forced to sell their land to the government at “fair market value,” not for a highway or a utility, but for a hiking trail. In cases where a property owner is allowed to stay, the government can force public access via a public right-of-way easement or impose regulatory sanctions to eliminate uses seen as “incompatible” with scenic resources."</div> <bR> <div> You need to also recognize that the land the greenway grabbers are after is usually the land along waterways and the most scenic views, so if you bought that property just for those reasons, you will now be forced out of your ownership in order to placate thieves who want what you bought and paid for.  Governments at local levels are part of the grander scheme of a national land grab under the guise of "greenways, land conservancies, smart growth, and wild lands projects."  It has become a national moral tragedy, giving power brokers in government the license to steal property from Americans who purchased that land with their own blood, sweat and tears. </div> <bR> <div> Worse than just the eminent domain abuse, is also the use of our tax dollars to provide grants to the greenway projects, land conservancies, smart growth initiatives, and wild lands projects.  Simply stated, they are using our own money to support stealing private property from the unlucky souls who get in their way.   Using tax dollars to undermine private property rights guaranteed in the Constitution has to be one of the Progressives most treasured delights.  (I didn't want to use the other crass phrase describing that.)</div> <bR> <div> 'Feel good' rhetoric about how we need to save green space and make everybody healthy, save the planet, etc., is over-riding common sense and the very foundation of our country.  If we would just call the greenways what they are, i.e. theft, then maybe people would get the message.</div> <bR> <div> As John Adams so wisely stated:</div> <bR> <div> <I>"If people can't feel secure in perhaps their most significant investment in life - a cabin, a farm, a purchase that is part of their dream - if they can't participate and have due process before governmental agencies, if they cannot feel secure in that, then we do not have liberty."</I></div> <bR> <div> Will people just throw away everything for the short term gratification of giving in to peer pressure and hype?  Don't answer that....I know the answer and I don't like the answer.  Where are the grownups?</div> <bR> <div> Added:  WWII Vet Loses his land by eminent domain, March 2010, for a recreational park in Matthews, NC <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://activerain.com/blogsview/1645071/eminent-domain-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://activerain.com/blogsview/1645071/"><U><U>http://activerain.com/blogsview/1645071/eminent-domain-the-good-the-bad-the-ugly</U></U></A></FONT></div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="malaprops_for_christmas"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Malaprops for Christmas</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> 12-19-10</div> <bR> <div> mal·a·prop·ism: <FONT SIZE="3" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Tahoma Bold" > </FONT> [mal-uh-prop-iz-uhm] </div> <bR> <div> -noun</div> <div> 1. an act or habit of misusing words ridiculously, esp. by the confusion of words that are similar in sound.</div> <div> 2. an instance of this, as in “Lead the way and we'll precede.”</div> <bR> <div> Dear Friends,</div> <bR> <div> It's been a very interesting year. It has been snowing twisted language from our politicians all year, language that has been used to bring wonderment and awe upon the American landscape.</div> <bR> <div> Nancy Pelosi promised "Ethics and Transparency" in the House. By ethics and transparency she meant: Rangel gets a slap on the wrist and we don't "know what is in the bill until we pass it." "Transparency" means only until they throw Julian Assange in the fireplace with the wrapping papers and finish buying off all that remains of the press.  Bells will be ringing!</div> <bR> <div> Bring on the "Net Neutrality" regulations. Hmmm . . . where "neutrality" means you cannot use your blog to relate criticism of the government without competing pop up windows from leftist writers who want their views to override yours. What this means is "neutralize the enemies' message,” with the enemies being you and me. Think about it . . . "neutralizing" someone is not usually a friendly phrase. Eggnog anyone?</div> <bR> <div> Next, let's contemplate Barack Obama's idea of American "Energy Independence." This is where he shuts down all of our drilling and exploration of oil so we can pay through the nose for foreign oil, and keep subsidizing ethanol, windmills, and solar panels, all too expensive for middle class and poor people to keep up simple lifestyles. "Independence" for whom? Not for you and me, that's for sure. More lights on the tree this year? Just wait 'til he decorates your house with Smart Meters!!  Now that should cut down on those joyful Christmas lights.</div> <bR> <div> While we are on that subject, let's look at the "Green" energy policies that cause all appliances to be unaffordable unless subsidized with tax rebates, and cause housing construction prices to go through the roof. Yep, green means you pay more. The use of the word "green" is very interesting . . . as in green dollar bills. "Green" is what "they" get while trying to convince you that you are a slug on the planet who doesn't deserve to keep what you earn and must pay "them" for their ability to create scarcities of resources. "Green" is what they get when you pay boatloads for a box of Corn Flakes while they subsidize corn-based ethanol. See? Green means money. And you thought it meant that pretty "greenery" you use to dress up your mantles for the holidays. Silly you.</div> <bR> <div> Next up is "Social Justice." This means that laws will be in favor of certain classes of people who thrive on making people think they are victims. Racial justice, gay justice, minority justice, eco justice, each synonymous with "social justice," which is only for favored groups. It isn't “justice" at all, but reparations being paid by people who did nothing to the supposedly offended class of so-called victims. You owe something to someone because someone else in some other century did something bad to someone who died two or three hundred years ago. Or, you didn't happen to hire a gay person or a brown person for whatever reason and you should pay for that. Or, more brown persons are in prison for crimes they committed, but they should not be punished because fewer white people are in prison. Get it? Justice? I don't think so, but Webster's dictionary is being "transformed" for purposes of political favoritism. Think of it as a Christmas Cookie Swap, where the left gets what someone else made, but didn't bring any cookies to swap. Nice deal, eh?</div> <bR> <div> "Health Insurance for pre-existing conditions!"  Now there is a star for your Christmas malapropsos tree. Insurance is a risk-based endeavor you purchase. Or it was. Now, thanks to Obama, "insurance" is a mandate and an entitlement. In Malapropsland, insurance means, "pay for this or I'll shoot you." Actually, they'll garnish your wages and wreck your credit rating or seize your house, or take whatever else suits their greed. Definitely a shining star at the top of your Christmas tree, placed there by a mostly Muslim guy who says he is a Christian, but bows to the Saudi Princes.  </div> <bR> <div> Snow? Did you say it is snowing? Snowing in Malapropsland? Indeed it is! I'd better go see if I can find some more "green" to pay for all these new ornaments on our tree this year.  </div> <bR> <div> In closing, I hope you all manage to find lot of "green" (as in money),and boxes of Corn Flakes, and reasonable insurance, and individual justice, and the free flow of information, and most of all, blessed independence from the Kings and Queens of Malapropsland.  </div> <bR> <div> Merry Christmas to all, and to all a free pocket Constitution! GET ONE HERE! http://www.askheritage.org/premium.aspx?utm_source=PocketConstGoogleText&utm_medium=cpc&utm_content=Optimized1&utm_campaign=PocketConst</div> <bR> <div> Best wishes and love,</div> <div> Cheryl</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="coming_to_grips_with_my_inner_tipper"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Coming to grips with my inner Tipper</div> <div> Jonna Bishop Bingham</div> <div> November 18, 2010</div> <bR> <div> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” That's the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America - and I'm down with it. I remember as a big-haired teenager in the '80s being upset with Tipper Gore for campaigning to slap that telltale “parental advisory” sticker on my favorite albums. I had just learned about the Constitution in my ninth-grade Government class, and as far as I was concerned, she was trying to squash Mötley Crüe's freedom of speech!</div> <bR> <div> Before Tipper shined the light on heavy metal, my mom and dad were completely in the dark about what I was listening to. All they knew was that it was loud and it got on their nerves. With the addition of Tipper's warning sticker, I was busted. No more head-banging greatness peppered with the occasional “damn” or “hell” for amplified sentiment. All of a sudden you had to fight for your right to party (just like the Beastie Boys).</div> <bR> <div> Thanks to the Tipper Sticker, every purchase from Record Bar was subject to inspection by my parents. I had to resort to smuggling in my musical paraphernalia. What a kick in the teeth for teenage rebellion.</div> <bR> <div> Fast-forward about 20 years. I'm older, wiser, responsible, I work for a living and I'm a mother of an impressionable 7-year-old boy. I have a lot more sense than I used to. So now when I'm listening to music - and I listen to all kinds - I don't really see the need for the bad language. The artist, as far as I'm concerned, could have made the exact same point without running the risk of getting labeled with the warning sticker. Just the same, to each his own. The artist has a right - based on the Constitution - to use whatever language he or she is compelled to use and to write about whatever comes to mind. Just like I have a right to purchase it and listen to it. Their choice to say it, my choice to listen, anyone's choice to listen.</div> <bR> <div> But one recent morning, I walked to the bus stop with my son - my precious little son who I've tried to raise with some manners, morals, a sense of self, some independence (but not too much) and a definite understanding of right and wrong. I try my best to protect the boy from harm, to guard his innocence. Kids today grow up so fast - there's no need for him to know about bad stuff or adult stuff. I watch what I talk about in front of him; I monitor what he listens to on the radio and the things he sees on TV. I care about what goes into him because I care about what's liable to come out of him.</div> <bR> <div> So Matthew and I were standing at the bus stop as we do every morning, along with probably 10 other kids, when a car pulled up to drop off another child. I had heard the bass thumping from down the street. It wasn't just the noise from the car stereo assaulting our ears, but the music itself.</div> <bR> <div> The chorus was a series of profanities wrapped around a racial slur, repeated over and over and over. The person behind the microphone was rapping about killing people, plain and simple. I tried to cover Matthew's ears, but the music was simply too loud.</div> <bR> <div> Had we left the bus stop, Matthew would have missed the bus. I just had to stand there and hear it. And even worse, my absorbent little sponge of a son - who struggles already with the temptation to let a bad word slip out now and again - was forced to hear it. And what about the little girl in the car who had a front-row seat?</div> <bR> <div> Again, I'm down with the Constitution and your right to sing whatever you like and your right to listen to it. But when my son cannot stand at the bus stop - a place where elementary school children wait to be taken to school so they can learn - then I have a real problem. Don't I have a right not to be pummeled with F-bombs and accounts of drive-by shootings and the like? Doesn't my son have that right?</div> <bR> <div> Just as we have laws against public indecency and the smoking ban in restaurants, I think there should be some sort of law against blaring obscenities at a place where people, young and old, are gathered. If there's not a law against auditory assault on children at the bus stop, then maybe I'll petition to get one.</div> <bR> <div> Just like Twisted Sister, we're not gonna take it anymore.</div> <bR> <div> <I>Jonna Bishop Bingham is a Mount Holly, NC resident.</I></div> <div> This column originally appeared in <I>the Gaston Gazette</I>, Gastonia, NC.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="going_begging"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Going Begging!</div> <div> Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> October 6, 2010</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U><U>http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="http://paintedplums.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://paintedplums.blogspot.com"><U><U>http://paintedplums.blogspot.com</U></U></A></div> <bR> <div> This editorial is in response to ArtSpace being PAID to come here (Gastonia, NC) to explore "affordable" development for artists.</div> <bR> <div> First, know this: I love art and I think Gastonia has some very good artists and some not very good artists.  Art is subjective, like taste in foods or decorating, so it is all about opinion.  I am an artist and I like the idea of artists achieving success to whatever heights they can achieve.  I believe in art education.  I believe art guilds, made up of artists who support each other, can do much to promote the arts. The Gaston County Art Guild already does receive NEA grants for operating capital, to promote art education and to create exhibits. In years past, our Art Guild has done a great job here.  It has taken a monumental effort of a few people who worked very hard.  I love patrons of the arts who support the arts community here and everywhere.  I know artists who have been successful without taking government grants and handouts to do it.  I also know artists who struggle and lament the fact that Gastonia is not an art Mecca for their chosen life's work.  I, for one, would like Gastonia artists to be successful and thrive.  </div> <bR> <div> While art is my career and a life's blood to my soul, I do not expect taxes to support my chosen career. Lately, I am the lone voice for capitalism in art.  By that I mean that I think art should be able to stand on its own two feet and not depend totally on tax money for its existence.  Voluntary, tax deferred, donations from patrons is one thing.  And that is a good thing in times when the government is not in debt.  But, draining money from the Federal government, the State government, and the County government to support private artists is against my grain.  Government promoting art education in the schools, buying art for public buildings, cityscapes, and enhancements to cities, all of that is fine with me in prosperous times.  But using government money to prop up art in the private sector is a misuse of government.  Government is to be used for roads and bridges and infrastructures that make our society livable, safe, and viable.  Art does not fit into that category any more than government should be propping up welfare for anyone else's chosen career.  Should non-profit grants, i.e. the government, buy buildings for tire dealers, nail salons, clothing stores, lawyers' offices? </div> <bR> <div> In case you are confused, ArtSpace is a non-profit using both government money and tax deferred donations for grants.  Since the national economy has tanked, non-profits are proliferating like rabbits in efforts to use government money to support their agendas.  This is not helping the nation's debt situation, but rather draining the coffers for a lot of unnecessary pet projects.  Do you want your tax dollars to prop up artists in Tuscaloosa and, at the same time, drain the nation of tax money for other necessary functions?</div> <bR> <div> I believe art can and will survive without government handouts.  I am not attending the ArtSpace meeting at Gaston Day School for one reason.  I don't think great, or even good, art needs welfare to survive.  Government grants, in my view, are welfare from the government.  ArtSpace, a non-profit, has built its model on government grants.  If you take a look at a Google search of 'art non-profit organizations,' your head will spin with the results.  Thousands upon thousands of these organizations exist today.  And they are built layer upon layer of umbrellas with small ones under the big ones under yet bigger ones.  Seems everyone is setting up a non-profit to lobby for government money.</div> <bR> <div> So I would suggest some food for thought on the idea that Gastonia should be begging ArtSpace or any other grant organization to come in and bathe the community with more government money. </div> <bR> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Is art as vital as food and water and roads and schools?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">While you are working in the private sector to provide a living for your family, do you want your tax money going to support artists?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Has anyone noticed that, when Gastonia had thriving industry, the town had money for art patrons who supported the local artists and guild?  (The Rauch family and other thriving corporate donors come to mind.)</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Every day lately I open the pages of the Gastonia Gazette to see another headline announcing more and more Federal money pouring into Gastonia for all kinds of projects.  Is Gastonia now a welfare community?  Is that what we have become?  </div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Bad planning for decades has led to our destitute downtown area.  Are we now to ask the Feds to bail us out of our bad choices?  </div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">If our devastated industries are gone because of bad Federal and State policies, does that mean we soak the tax payers for those bad decisions?  Or do we find a way to buck up and fix our own area and get rid of politicians with destructive tendencies?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">If the arts are so vital to Gastonia, is there no private sector developer who sees the opportunity here?  If not, why not? </div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">If Gastonia is such a great opportunity for ArtSpace, why are we using grants to PAY them to come here?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Art Meccas are usually in high tourist traffic destinations.  Asheville, Taos, New Mexico, Santa Barbara, California, etc.  Does being on the way to one of those places qualify for that category?  </div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">The life's work of our government leadership seems to now be the art of begging for Federal money to pour into Gastonia to save us from bad decisions government leadership has made.  Maybe we need to think about that?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Is using Federal tax money for the arts creating a circular problem of spiraling national debt? Digging the hole deeper?  Do you want your grandchildren to know that you put them further into debt to support some artists in a community that is struggling to pay for schools?  Can we choose our priorities?</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700dc00000000.png" HEIGHT="15" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Does having a government grant-supported building for artists in Gastonia somehow turn Gastonia into an art destination?  Really?  </div> <bR> <bR> <div> Believe me, my views here are not popular with most artists who are looking to be saved by the government from the bad economy or from their own lack of business.  The truth is, I believe we do have some really superior, hard working, artists here and I believe they deserve to do well.  I want them to do well, including myself.  I just don't think government money should be the savior of art and artists.  For myself, I wonder if one has to use government money to support one's art, how viable is one's art?  I'm saying that whether ArtSpace decides to come here or not, we can thrive onward with the right attitude towards the professional artists who live here.  What is that attitude?  Buy from them when you can.  Support them with your pocketbooks and your moral support. Speaking for myself, if you can't, I understand that paying for food and rent is more important than art.  I also understand that the national debt is a desperate and dire situation and I don't want to make it worse.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="scam_on_you"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Scam On You! Land trusts and conservancies are "green" assaults on property rights.</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> October 21, 2010</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U><U>http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></U></A></div> <div> http://pundithouse.com</div> <bR> <bR> <div> Our local newspaper published an article today touting the exciting revelation that the Carolina Thread Trail recently awarded $564,795.00 worth of grants to 13 community projects.  The Carolina Thread Trail is part of a network of non-profit organizations related to the Lands Conservancy and Land Trust organizations.  While the writer of the article was obviously excited about this announcement, I wonder if anyone reading the article would be interested to know where the money comes from.  If you are one person asking that question, here is the answer.  It is money from tax deductible donations (giving tax breaks to some) and tax money from all levels of government, making us all pay.  Can we afford to take land out of the hands of private ownership and place that land onto the public sector dole?  If we wish to continue to use taxes to undermine private property rights, why do it the slow way?  Why don't we just declare the entire country is a publicly held green zone and no one has a right to use their own land any more?</div> <bR> <div> The premise of the Lands Conservancy groups is a scam.  First it is based on the lies of anthropologically (man-made) caused climate change, which is a political lie.  And secondly, but worse, it is anti-private property rights.  In case you are not aware of it, the United States Federal government already owns thirty percent of all the land in the country.  (Should the U.S. default on its debts, our land could be "snatched up" by whoever holds those debts.  Speak Chinese anyone?)  That is just the Federal government.  Millions and millions of acres of land are currently being bought out at fire sale prices, using tax incentives by the Land Trusts and Land Conservancy non-profits in the country.   The confiscation of land by government supported Lands Conservancies and Land Trusts is using your / our tax dollars to take land out of reach for any private citizens' use whatsoever for all eternity.  Donations to these organizations are tax deductible also, so not only is the property tax on these lands lost, but the donation tax breaks are lost to the government.  Why?  All for the prospect of keeping land out of the control of private ownership, putting land out of reach for private purposes, and wearing silly green hats and badges for "green" causes.</div> <bR> <div> "Oh," you say, "but what about the "feel good" opportunity to save our environment from those dastardly developers who wreck the landscape?"  Well, you can "feel good" all you want, but government grants coming out of your taxes means you are paying for property that will forever NOT be owned and controlled by private citizens.  The Carolina Thread Trail is just another avenue for taking private property out of the hands of citizens and using taxes to do it.  </div> <bR> <div> Today's local newspaper article written by Amanda Memrick states it this way: "Scenic land that might otherwise be <B>snatched</B> up by developers and turned into subdivisions or shopping centers is being conserved, thanks to low land prices brought on by the soured real estate market."</div> <bR> <div> Note the word, "SNATCHED."  The higher property taxes and other taxes become, more of these non-profit groups use tax dollars to "snatch" up privately owned land.  The higher property and estate taxes become, the private ownership of land becomes near impossible.  The worse the economy, the more opportunity for government to put "developers" out of business.  Who do you think is making themselves "feel good" about that?  The big government anti-private property groups, Lands Conservancy groups, and the Carolina Thread Trail.  Mind you, government, non-profits, Lands Conservancies, and the Carolina Thread Trail do not pay taxes on the property they confiscate.  Instead, they use your money by force to support their agendas.  So, who would you say is doing the "snatching?"</div> <bR> <div> The newspaper article also cites Randi Gates, Carolina Thread Trail community coordinator saying: "We see a rise in property values that are adjacent to trails."  </div> <bR> <div> However, to show you how manipulations of tax laws create a self-fulfilling prophecy, here is a quote from Land Trust: "An easement may confer federal and state income tax advantages. If property appreciates greatly heirs may not be able to pay the taxes. A conservation easement on land may reduce a property's value and thus reduce estate taxes allowing heirs to keep the property." </div> <bR> <div> First, I might ask, keep the property for what?  The Land Conservancies' uses are restricted.  And which is it?  Rise or fall of property values regarding Land Trusts and Conservancies?  I guess it depends on which side of the fence you are on. Taxpayer or tax taker.  The taxes for heirs on property they inherit is reduced or eliminated, but the land sits there with no possibility of any control by the heirs. Maybe they somehow technically "own" the land, but they take tax deductions in trade for regulations and restrictions on what they can do with that land.  What is the point of holding the land?  You could sell it outright for someone to actually make a living off of that land, or you can sit there and get tax deductions for letting the land go to some public use that is no longer under your control.  As the government makes policies pushing landholders and farm families out of business, the heirs have two choices: turn the land over to the land trusts and conservancies and get tax deductions for life, or sell the land to someone else who can use it for capital production.  Again, tax policies will punish you if you sell and make a profit or if you inherit the land.  Government policies are manipulating the outcome.  What would socialists have you do?  Make a living off of the land?  Or sit on your butt and get tax deductions for doing nothing?  And who is paying for that?  As Margaret Thatcher wisely stated, "Socialism is just great, but sooner or later you run out of other people's money." But I digress.</div> <bR> <div> Another assertion by Randi Gates was that the Thread Trail easements' and greenways' benefits include: "alternative transportation, environmental benefits of getting cars off the road and the health benefits of getting people to walk, run or pedal down a greenway.  She says, "This helps economic development." </div> <bR> <div> Excuse me, how does increasing taxes to pay for greenways help economic development? When was the last time lots of people took the greenway to work or to the grocery store?  When does taking a walk on a greenway replace cars on the road?  Yes, it's nice to have a place to walk, run, or bike, but is this the best use of tax money when the country is nearly 14 trillion dollars in debt?  We can take a walk in our own neighborhoods for a lot less money.  If you don't live exactly adjacent to the greenway, you have to drive to get there anyway.  How much sense does this make? </div> <bR> <div> A bad economic climate hurts privately owned business as well as residential property owners.  Government policies create our economic climate.  Government policies and taxes can keep otherwise expendable, and recreational, income out of the hands of the population, not to mention income for necessities.  So when government confiscates more and more income from citizens, privately owned businesses suffer.  When privately owned businesses collapse from these policies, unemployment goes up, property values do down, and higher taxes ensue so government will attempt to make up for the lost tax base.  And the whole thing becomes a downward spiral of declining abilities to thrive.  While some take advantage of tax deductions for purposes of Land Conservancies and Trusts, the rest of the population has to pay increased taxes to make up the difference.  We end up with lots of regulations, plus parks and greenways maintained by public tax money, but the tax base is diminished.  Meanwhile the land is no longer considered privately owned property.   </div> <bR> <div> All of this becomes an opportunity for land confiscation by the non-profit environmental groups.  The legal creativity of the trust and easement agreements is wide ranging and covers all kinds of land use circumstances.  In this way, they have all of the bases covered.   They can "snatch" up property at undervalued prices.  They can hand out more tax deductions to those wealthy enough to donate and those who are struggling to pay the higher property taxes.  They can let someone live on the land with severe restrictions for the rest of their life and then the land falls into government hands.  And, here is the cutest part, the Trusts and Conservancies can market themselves as the "feel good" green cause du jour!"</div> <bR> <div> Just remember this:  When you play this game of chasing down tax deductions for anti-private property rights initiatives, you are hitting your fellow Americans in the gut three ways.  First, while you ease your personal burden of tax debt you are placing that burden of tax debt on everyone else.  Second, increasing America's debt burden puts the entire country at risk.  Third, you are undermining the essential market principles of legitimate private ownership on which the country is founded. When government colludes with non-profits to "snatch" land rights using tax money to subsidize these land deals, we are all suffering the consequences from it.</div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="blacks_have_separated_themselves_from"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Blacks Have Separated Themselves from America</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> 8-29-2010</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> I am reflecting on two experiences from the past couple of weeks, one being my high school class reunion and one being Glenn Beck's incredible rally in D.C. That being said, I also have a dream. My dream resembles Glenn Beck's dream of an America united around the founding principles. Failures aside, the dream of the founding principles is the goal and has always been, at least to me. This is why I believe Glenn Beck is finding so much support from mainstream Americans who believe in and strive for that dream.</div> <bR> <div> Whatever else Martin Luther King had on his agenda, his words of "judging the content of character, not the color on one's skin," resonated with Americans then and now. Those words summed up the entire perception I had of his struggle for equal rights. Those words are what I thought the struggle was about. I now realize that King's words don't represent the dream of the majority of blacks in America. I say that because those words are not what blacks have attempted to achieve. The goal post shifted from those words.</div> <bR> <div> King's marches and speeches have become a platform for angry blacks to achieve both reparations and an elevated status that's far more divisive than uniting. The words we thought were so inspiring, so uniting, became an avenue for blackmailing the country via guilt trips born from the chips on the shoulders of every black American who views himself or herself as a victim of white Americans. Equal justice has been twisted into social or racial justice. Equal opportunity has become racial quotas. Equal opportunity has become affirmative action. Pursuit of happiness has become a perverted government guarantee of anything you need or desire.</div> <bR> <div> I just returned from my high school class reunion. I grew up in the 50's and 60's in a small town in Ohio. I went to an integrated school. There were middle class blacks all through school who came from all walks of life. My black classmates shared the same education as I, shared the same access to everything in town, shared in every available activity. No one was barred from anything. I don't remember black classmates walking around with chips on their shoulders expecting whites to feel guilty and bow down to them for their victimhood.</div> <bR> <div> As people do at reunions, my classmates gathered in groups who had things in common. And, as with any town in any place, there were cliques, if you want to classify groups. But these divisions were voluntary. During the 50's I did notice social barriers regarding marriage between races, but other than this I cannot think of any other perceived restrictions. And in fairness to even that, those social barriers were put in place by generations of both blacks and whites. It wasn't a one-way street. We voluntarily interacted with very likable and friendly middle class blacks every day. </div> <bR> <div> Sadly, by the middle of the 1960's, with the race riots going on in the South, the attitudes were beginning to change among our black classmates and the blacks in town. Now here is the rub: we were in the North, and our area was known as a conduit for the Underground Railroad during the Civil War. Our area was full of abolitionist history. This was a point of pride while I grew up, and reminders of our history were a part of our education. But, by the 1960's, the oppression and subsequent riots in the South was permeating the attitude of the blacks in the North. Blacks were beginning to look at whites as the enemy, no matter where in the country they lived. The controversies of the day did not escape our little town.</div> <bR> <div> So I went back to this reunion thinking our black classmates would be there. One in particular, who was always in my homeroom, was a girl I always liked. I was looking forward to catching up with her and finding out how her life had been going. No show. Not one black classmate attended, not one. The great divide has happened and Blacks no longer believe they are part of what was once an integrated, fully functioning and united society. The town I grew up in was not the oppressive South, but yet the attitudes of my black classmates have been tainted by a victim mentality that didn't previously exist, but has become common to Black America. Our class held a reunion and our black classmates decided not to participate.</div> <bR> <div> I've seen the good, the bad and the ugly regarding race in this country. Apparently the bad and the ugly triumphed over the good.</div> <bR> <div> There are websites and media outlets making a big deal about how few blacks attended Glenn Beck's rally. But blacks were invited. All could go and relish freedom's message, just as white people could. There were no exclusionary rules. For some reason, a majority of blacks don't choose to participate in the American dream of unity and the founding principles. They are on a conflicting mission, one that does not fit into the American dream. Their mission is the Obama message of social justice, the Sharpton message, the Congressional Black Caucus message, the reparations message, the affirmative action message, or whatever it is they are hearing from the Marxist left.  </div> <bR> <bR> <div> Race has become a worse divider of America than it was, under the victim mentality indoctrinated into the black population. That is why disagreement with the Marxist black political agenda earns you a racist tag. It doesn't have to be this way. And in one town in the North where I grew up, it didn't used to be this way. That is truly lamentable.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_power_of_policy_wonks_and_you"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Power of Policy Wonks and You</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> August 2, 2010</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> I don't know about you, but I woke up one day, some undetermined moment a few years ago, and suddenly found myself in a country that is being run by an overabundance of rules put in place by unrecognizable government leaders. By unrecognizable, I mean people with whom I can't relate. By that I mean, people with which I have nothing in common. I look at Nancy Pelosi and wonder, how in the world did that woman land a position representing any American? I look at Barney Frank and wonder, who votes for this guy? I look at Obama and ask myself, from where is he getting these policy ideas that very few people in America want, or even like? Our unrecognizable government has become a politburo that's so far out of the American experience that I can't help but ask the question, "What planet are these people from?"</div> <bR> <div> We are experiencing a government disconnect like I have never seen. Angelo Codevilla addressed this in a recent essay titled, <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16"><U><U>America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution</U></U></A></FONT>. This power struggle between the people and the government has everything to do with an ideology of power incompatible with practicality. People are generally practical. Yes, someone will occasionally take a flyer of extravagance, but people are mostly practical. Yet our government servants are living on an extravagance of power and foolishness that has put the practical masses far under water (14 trillion USD). We are drowning in arbitrary laws and unfathomable debt, laws and debt placed upon us by people who will never suffer the consequences of their decisions. The struggle is about power, i.e. the individual vs. the ruling class. I add to that, the underlying struggle is the ideology of power and how to attain it. And, that ideology is being thrust upon us by policy wonks who are anti-American, foreign, globalist, and greedy in nature and thought. </div> <bR> <div> Practical people don't sit around in think tanks worrying about ideology. That is not to say that practical people don't have a view of the "big picture" or that they don't care about philosophies of life. Practical people can and do grasp abstract problems, social dynamics, and understand the implications of power. However, practical people make useful things, solve everyday problems, and do what they need to do to survive.  Conversely, policy wonks use their time looking at statistics, discussing utopian outcomes, and find reasons to manipulate the practical people. Policy wonks are micro-managers who wish to micro-manage you for the sake of their own power.</div> <bR> <div> Cass Sunstein, for instance, is a great example of a micro-managing policy wonk.  Sunstein is Obama's Czar of Information and Regulatory Affairs (This is a new arm of the executive branch that Obama has created to give himself more power over the American people. Obama's Czars are not accountable to the people, but are arms of an ever-imposing executive branch of government). Sunstein, who has a law degree, has spent his entire life in the legal profession, academia and government positions. He has co-authored books which describe his ideological philosophies and recommendations for the implementation of those philosophies.  </div> <bR> <div> According to <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunstein" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_Sunste"><U><U>Wikipedia</U></U></A></FONT>, Sunstein co-authored <I>Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness</I> with Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago (Yale University Press, 2008). Nudge discusses how public and private organizations can help people make better choices in their daily lives. Thaler and Sunstein argue:</div> <bR> <div> People often make poor choices - and look back at them with bafflement! We do this because as human beings, we all are susceptible to a wide array of routine biases that can lead to an equally wide array of embarrassing blunders in education, personal finance, health care, mortgages and credit cards, happiness, and even the planet itself.</div> <bR> <div> In other words, Mr. Sunstein believes that institutions of governance should "Nudge" you into choices regarding your everyday life. Now that he is in charge of Information and Regulations, he has the power to do just that ("Nudge" is just a nice word for force, by the way). Examining the categories above in which Sunstein wishes to "Nudge" the people, I almost broke out laughing. He suggests government can better regulate our choices in those categories, while in reality our government education system is failing, government finance is corrupt and crumbling, health care is imploding under Obama, mortgages under Fannie and Freddie have bankrupted our government, and he wants credit regulations for the people while the government borrows 14 trillion USD. Who is he kidding? Would you take advice from people who created that mess?</div> <bR> <div> Sunstein wants the government to micromanage the people's choices without the people's consent. He isn't kidding. While he says that we are all susceptible to routine biases, Mr. Sunstein's own personal biases are suitable to force onto everyone else.  This is what Obama's "change" was about, i.e. ideologues and policy wonks telling you how to live and taking the power out of the hands of the practical people, out of the hands of Americans, out of the hands of the voters. A new slave class made up of middle class practical Americans is upon us, brought to us by policy wonks hired by Barack Obama. You see, he likes slavery as long as it empowers him and his policy wonks. </div> <bR> <div> There is nothing historically great or new about Obama and his policy wonks. His policies are based on creating centralized power, having nothing to do with practical reality. Today, practical people are being forced to follow impractical policies put in place by ideological policy wonks. They are Codeville's ruling class.</div> <bR> <div> Example A: Government forced banks into high risk loans to satisfy social engineering goals favored by policy wonks. </div> <bR> <div> Example B: Government forced car companies into manufacturing $40,000.00 cars that travel 40 miles on a battery charge. </div> <bR> <div> Example C: Windmills, pushed by government policies, consume more energy attempting to create energy than they can produce.</div> <bR> <div> This is upside-down and backwards from the American dream and the U.S. Constitution.  The next time you see a policy wonk tell him or her to have a glass of wine, gather their fellow bohemians and muse the meaning of life on some utopian tropical isle, preferably outside of the United States (maybe Cuba?). Just leave the rest of us, the practical Americans, alone.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_ruling_class_in_america___angelo_m_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Ruling Class in America - Angelo M. Codevilla</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> July, 2010</div> <bR> <div> I found the most articulate description of our circumstances on <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16"><U><U>The American Spectator: America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution</U></U></A></FONT>. The article is written by Angelo M. Codevilla. It is a very readable, however long, dissertation on the history of how we have landed into an era of corrupt aristocracy that the Founders abhorred and tried their best to avoid.  It is well worth your time to read it . . . an excerpt below:</div> <bR> <div> By making economic rules dependent on discretion, our bipartisan ruling class teaches that prosperity is to be bought with the coin of political support. Thus in the 1990s and 2000s, as Democrats and Republicans forced banks to make loans for houses to people and at rates they would not otherwise have considered, builders and investors had every reason to make as much money as they could from the ensuing inflation of housing prices. When the bubble burst, only those connected with the ruling class at the bottom and at the top were bailed out.</div> <bR> <div> Similarly, by taxing the use of carbon fuels and subsidizing "alternative energy," our ruling class created arguably the world's biggest opportunity for making money out of things that few if any would buy absent its intervention. The ethanol industry and its ensuing diversions of wealth exist exclusively because of subsidies. The prospect of legislation that would put a price on carbon emissions and allot certain amounts to certain companies set off a feeding frenzy among large companies to show support for a "green agenda," because such allotments would be worth tens of billions of dollars. That is why companies hired some 2,500 lobbyists in 2009 to deepen their involvement in "climate change." At the very least, such involvement profits them by making them into privileged collectors of carbon taxes. Any "green jobs" thus created are by definition creatures of subsidies -- that is, of privilege. What effect creating such privileges may have on "global warming" is debatable. But it surely increases the number of people dependent on the ruling class, and teaches Americans that satisfying that class is a surer way of making a living than producing goods and services that people want to buy.</div> <bR> <div> When Progressives of either party use the power of taxation to exalt themselves, annihilate the Constitution, pick winners and losers, and create the "pay to play" game, we are ALL LOSERS. America has become the worst of what we knew as the Soviet Union. It is disgusting and unforgivable. And those participating in this "fundamental transformation" of America should be tried for treason. However, the Progressives own the Judicial, Legislative and Executive branches of government; therefore no one will be tried and punished for ruining our country. </div> <bR> <div> Our elections have been violated by literal criminals. We have discovered this week that Al Franken was elected by felons who voted illegally in Minnesota. Can you spell “ACORN?” What have we come to when felons voting illegally can elect a comedian to the United States Senate? What a country! Or should I say, in what country do we reside (Chicago is not a country)?</div> <bR> <div> Those of us lacking the uncorrupted power of our own votes sigh and wonder, why vote at all? Since affirmative action our electoral districts are gerrymandered to ignore "one person, one vote." The law, which used to stand between us and the corrupt, now is so broken that we have no Lady Justice to hold our virtues.  Our Lady is no longer blind, but she has been made into a thug for the privileged ruling class, twisted and bribed and crumpled into a useless hunk of historical ideology that no longer applies to us.</div> <bR> <div> I had a conversation with a lawyer once (a lawyer who actually had some level of honesty I had not seen before from a lawyer) who-when I groused over the unfairness of the opposition to my case-said, " If you are looking for justice, you won't find it on this earth or in this county. You'll have to look beyond this life." Naive as I was at the time, I was shocked at this revelation. I now see so clearly what he meant. </div> <bR> <div> Read the article; you will find the tangled web of bondage woven around us by a "ruling class" that sneaked up through public schools and universities and are now strangling the life out of the American people and our way of life. They are parasites who will eventually kill the host and then cannibalize the world. The knowledge in the article is enlightening, as it should be. But it is not comforting. The "ruling class" is so entrenched that our knowing does not daunt them. They mock and laugh and thrust the economic knives in harder than ever. Theirs is arrogance at the pinnacle of power. </div> <bR> <div> It is our turn to take that power away and put down their not so "soft revolution" of aristocracy. We will either take back America or we will be suffocated into extinction. It's a choice.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="no_such_thing_as_carbon_neutral"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>No Such Thing as Carbon Neutral</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> June 26, 2010</div> <div> http://myteaprtychronicle.blogspot.com</div> <bR> <div> Sigh. Think. Exhale CO2. Type. Inhale. Exhale CO2. Type. Type. Exhale CO2. Lights on. Air-conditioning on due to 95 degree heat. Type. Type some more. Exhale CO2.  Make a cup of tea, using water, using tea packet packaged in paper, using microwave oven. Think. Computer search pertinent subjects. Make some toast using bread, baked in ovens, wrapped in plastic bag, using electric toaster. Type. Exhale CO2. Type some more. Wipe hands with paper napkin so as to not mess up keyboard with buttery fingers.  Inhale. Exhale more CO2. Think. Type some more. </div> <bR> <div> How guilty are you for your nasty, despicable carbon habits? You are sooooo bad. And you're even worse if you are a greedy American user of energy. Ooooohhhhh, you are soooooo bad, exhaling all that CO2, enjoying toast and tea on a hot summer day in air-conditioned bliss.</div> <bR> <div> You can't be worth your salt on the earth if you are using carbon based energy. Of course salt is bad, too, so that can't be worth much. All of your recycling efforts were not enough to satisfy 'their' desires for paradise. The trees you planted didn't get 'them' what 'they' wanted. The hybrid vehicle you bought did not buy your way out of your guilt. You will pay for your terrible, disgusting, evil indiscretions. You are a plague upon the earth and 'they' will punish you for your evil ways. 'They' know you can't achieve carbon neutrality and remain alive. 'They' have figured you out, you selfish, undeserving, pimple on the planet. You are the cause of all that is bad. </div> <bR> <div>  'They' (who are so much smarter than you) have blitzed the country with propaganda, intent upon molding your mushy minds and assuring your submission to their plans. 'They' are using the Churches to push `their' environmental agenda. 'They' have told your children how bad you are. 'They' have made your children believe human beings are a scourge that must be reined into environmental submission so the Earth can survive. 'They' (Franklin Raines who scammed Fannie out of 90 million dollars while letting the company go broke) bought the patents for carbon tracking devices for your home using your tax dollars through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.</div> <bR> <div> The President's cronies own the Chicago Carbon Exchange, which is set to rake it in with carbon offset trading when cap and tax rules are in place. You know, the environmental shake-down money you will have to pay to use your toaster or heat your house. The same buddies are owners of Shore Bank in Chicago, where 'They' promote micro-lending to Kenyans, who can't pay back the loans, while the bank gets bailed out with your tax dollars.  </div> <bR> <div> 'They' know who you are and where you live. They' will find you and make you suffer for wrecking their terrestrial utopia. 'They' are planning `their' revenge against you and you can't stop them. 'They' are taking every piece of land they can get their hands on through eminent domain, lands conservancies, greenways, and walking trails, so you will no longer despoil their Earthly perfection with your home or industry (The Federal government already owns nearly 30% of all land in America).</div> <bR> <div> If you can't stop yourself from driving your car, cooking in your kitchen, heating and cooling your home, exhaling CO2, then 'They' will charge you fees you can't afford. 'They' have set up unelected local authorities through the EPA who have no accountability to voters and who will decide who uses what resources to 'their' ends.</div> <bR> <div> To insure your submission and compliance with 'their' vision of utopia, 'they' will place Smart meters on your home, GPS devices in your car, tax you for your non-compliant appliances, take away your incandescent light bulbs, tax your airline flight, tax your tickets to entertainment venues, tax and cut your water usage, tax your hair-dresser, tax your nail salon, tax your local deli, tax your (exhale CO2) dry cleaner, anything that does or doesn't move. 'Their' will be done on earth.</div> <bR> <div> Think. Inhale. Type. Exhale CO2. Sigh.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="arrogantocracy_and_rankin_lake"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Arrogantocracy and Rankin Lake</div> <div> Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</div> <bR> <div> If every time you stand up you are slapped down, soon you will no longer stand up. If every time you speak up you are ridiculed or ignored, soon you will no longer speak up. If every time you vote, your votes are ignored, pretty soon you will lose interest in voting. Is this apathy? Not really. It is a psychological discouragement to act. It is a twist on Pavlov's dog theory where encouragement begets action. In the case of the voter, it is the discouragement of action.</div> <bR> <div> Pavlov's training works both ways: action or non-action. When voting becomes a waste of your time and effort, why do it? Why bother to research the issues? Why bother to look into a candidate's qualifications? Why bother your little head to consider voting at all? Votes don't matter, so what is the point? Referendums have become a joke. Or they are a token crumb thrown out to make the public think they have some say in a matter, when in fact the public vote carries no weight with arrogant politicians.</div> <bR> <div> As politicians continue their march to arrogantocracy (*see definition below), the public loses motivation to vote. And this discouragement of a despairing electorate only serves the politicians who play more and more to groups of special interests. People are not apathetic. People have been trained by politicians to stay home, sit down, and shut up because their votes don't matter. Good little lap dogs.  Pavlov couldn't have done it better.</div> <bR> <div> This is the lesson the public is being taught time and again, over and over for the last several years of our elections. The turn out in the recent primary election was pathetic. Is it any wonder?</div> <bR> <div> Today we learn that, in spite of the votes against the parks referendum, the City Council and the Mayor have decided to borrow more money, committing the voters to more interest payments for what these politicians want: a park.</div> <bR> <div> In an economy where people need jobs and are struggling to make ends meet, by all means let's put them further into debt, tax them more, and renovate a park. And using a low voter turnout as an excuse, they say the vote didn't really reflect a true majority. So those who did take the time and effort to vote can be batted away as if their votes were null and void. If low voter turnout is some plausible reason, then couldn't you use the same low voter turnout to remove the same politicians from office? Those politicians who are elected in less of a majority of the entire electorate cannot operate with authority because they did not achieve a true majority.</div> <bR> <div> Using Mayor Stultz's logic, the election is not valid due to low turnout and must be ignored. Well, that makes me wonder what the percentage of electorate turnout was when she was elected. Maybe we should look into that. Note: “A little more than 17% of the country's registered voters came out to the polls during the last municipal election in 2007, down from 19% in 2005, according to the Gaston County Board of Elections.” http://www.gastongazette.com/articles/voters-38953-municipal-well.html</div> <bR> <div> Like the arena referendum in Charlotte, politicians ignored the vote. Just as Obama ignored the fact that well over 63% of Americans do not want his Health Care Reform, he ignores the will of the people. If you wonder why, over the past years, the public has become either disengaged or angry you only have to look at our own local government for the answer. In fact, politicians at all levels of government have rigged for themselves too much power and no accountability to the electorate. "Nice work if you can get it" comes to mind.  </div> <bR> <div> Sooner or later the public will be angry enough to stand up, speak out, and get rid of this arrogance in government. Sooner would be better than later.</div> <bR> <div> *This definition is by Michael Dingake, columnist who was referring to Zimbabwe and Botswana at the time.</div> <bR> <div> "It is a new term, which defines a peculiar shade in a government, particularly in so-called democracies; generally the phenomenon manifests itself in parties who have been in power for a long time; invariably such [parties] become arrogant, conceited, too self-confident to imagine they can ever be disposed by earthly means."</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="dependent_vs__independent_our_national"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Dependent vs. Independent: Our national problem</div> <div> Wilson A. Forbes, Jr.</div> <bR> <div> The following definitions are from <B>Webster's New World Dictionary of American English</B>, Third College Edition, Copyright 1988 by Simon & Schuster, Inc.: (The bold italics are mine.)</div> <bR> <div> <B>DEPENDENT</B>, adjective; 1 hanging down <B>2 </B>influenced, controlled, or determined by something else; contingent <B>3</B> <I><B>relying (on another) for support or aid</B></I> <B>4</B> subordinate <B>5 </B>addicted. noun; <B>1</B> <I><B>a person who depends on someone else for existence, support, etc.</B></I> 2 [Obsolete] a subordinate part</div> <bR> <div> <B>INDEPENDENT</B>, adjective; <B>1</B> <I><B>free from the influence, control, or determination of another or others</B></I>; specifically, <B>a)</B> <I><B>free from the rule of another; controlling or governing oneself; self-governing</B></I> <B>b)</B> free from influence , persuasion, or bias; objective <B>c)</B> <I><B>relying only on oneself or one's own abilities, judgment, etc.; self-confident; self-reliant</B></I> <B>d)</B> not adhering to any political party or organization <B>e)</B> not connected or related to another, to each other, or to a group; separate [2 and 3 omitted to save space - wafjr] noun;<B>1</B> <I><B>a person who is independent in thinking, action, etc.</B></I> <B>2</B> a voter who is not an adherent of or committed to any political party [3 omitted for space - wafjr]</div> <bR> <div> Well, I think you have it there in black and white, the two basic groups of people who now populate these United States. I generally don't like over-simplifications, but this is what the current American population looks like to me.</div> <bR> <div> In the early years of our republic, I believe there was only one group, independent people. In those days one had to cut one's own timber to build a house and barn. One had to work from sunup to sundown to provide for a family and to prosper. For that matter, everyone in a family had to work for the good of the family; every child had to help. Families took care of members who, for one reason or another, couldn't work. I suppose those who wouldn't work lived as bums or beggars, survived by stealing from others, or starved.</div> <bR> <div> The work ethic of our ancestors enabled them to achieve and prosper and make this a great country and an example for the world. They fought a foreign power to stay independent and launched a form of government intended to maintain that independence. Most of the immigrants who arrived later observed and learned that work ethic and succeeded according to their abilities. These persons who were independent in thinking and action relied on their own abilities and judgment; they were self-confident and self-reliant.</div> <bR> <div> Sadly, and unfortunately for the continued health of the republic, a second and very dangerous group of dependent people has come to prominence, mostly over the last 70 to 80 years. This group has been largely the creation of a political class which is diametrically opposed to the idea of people relying on themselves and thinking for themselves. Such politicians have convinced a significant portion of the populace that they must rely on them, the “government,” for support or aid and must depend on them, the “government,” for existence and support. </div> <bR> <div> Members of this dependent group are “owned” by their politicians, who have enacted laws which result in the remaining numbers of the independent population providing “support or aid” for them. This is called “socialism.” Socialism is, I believe, a form of moral bankruptcy. If this thinking prevails in the government of the United States it will mean the eventual bankruptcy of the country. We seem to be well on our way to that end.</div> <bR> <div> For the sake of my children and grandchildren, I hope you citizens awake!</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="which_history_do_we_celebrate_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Which History Do We Celebrate?</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass, author of <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>My Tea Party Chronicle</U></A></div> <bR> <div> I live in a unique place. It reminds me somewhat of Dickens' <I>A Tale of Two Cities</I>. In fact, the small city in which I live is more than a little divided. You see there are two historical events and places connected to this area, which represent the opposite sides of our current national struggle.</div> <bR> <div> One is just west of town, a national military historical park commemorating the Battle of Kings Mountain, a major turning point in the Revolutionary War. The other one, the Loray Mill, is on the west side, in town. There sits a dilapidated building that is the remnant of a large textile mill where, in 1929, a union strike fueled by Communists took place and two people were shot. The irony for me is that one place is the remembrance of how our freedom was defended, while the other place represents a tragedy of how communism influences labor unions. </div> <bR> <div> Kings Mountain National Military Park commemorates the bravery of patriots who triumphed over Patrick Ferguson's British troops, making them retreat. The Battle of Kings Mountain was a decisive rout for the patriots and Cornwallis was stunned. King George was learning that the cause of freedom would not be turned back in America. </div> <bR> <div> The other place is a sad story of how poor mill workers were used by Communists to foment a riot. The police were called in and a woman was shot to death. Somehow the police chief was also shot to death, possibly by accident by his own forces.  The National Textile Workers Union, a communist labor union, was led by a man named Fred Beal. He was released on bail after subsequent trials following the strike and he promptly fled to the Soviet Union. He became disillusioned in the Soviet Union and returned to the United States, surrendered to North Carolina authorities, but was later pardoned. The strike was not successful and the methods of the labor unions and communists were, henceforth, very unpopular in the South.</div> <bR> <div> So now and again someone makes some big deal about the Loray Mill.  It has been put on the National Register of Historic Places.  All because of a communist union plot to wreck the textile business and ruin the owners. The textile industry created a lot of wealth for this area of the country.  In fact, our small city would not have thrived at all were it not for the textile industry.  A thriving industry is a point of pride for those who own it and those who put their labor to work for it.</div> <bR> <div> The Loray mill is now a large brick building with broken glass windows and it sits like an empty ghost of the tragic events. The city leaders are always looking for some developer to come in and turn the place into some fabulous condos or commercial, mixed use development. But at the same time they want it to be a symbol of "the workers' unions" and their ability to demonize those bad mill owners.  So far no deals have come through. </div> <bR> <div> There are people in town who think this relic is a monument to the struggles of humanity. However, the Loray Mill may become the largest tax credit project in the state. It is often written about in the local paper as if this 1929 event was some great and glorious thing that we should all have tattooed on our hearts.  Our small city has no other major ties to history than this one dismal event, so it is looked at as something to commemorate. </div> <bR> <div> No, I don't support the abuse of employees.  And I do support employment safety laws that have been put in place to protect people to a reasonable degree. Laws have been put in place preventing labor abuses in the United States.  But, here we are.  From the Revolutionary War to the Marxist revolution, we exist in the middle of divergent paths where we'll either promote the U.S. Constitution or be consumed by impossible theories of collectivist utopia.</div> <bR> <div> Two historical events.  Two sets of ideology.  One event fought for liberty.  One event fought for mob tyranny.  One fought for the opportunity to create wealth.  The other fought for despising that wealth and forced wealth distribution.  One side fought for property rights.  The other side fought for the destruction of property rights. Separated by one hundred and fifty years and a few geographical miles, these places might as well be light-years apart.</div> <bR> <div> One community encapsulates the metaphor for our time.  Do you celebrate the creation of industry and wealth, which brings jobs and livelihoods to our people?  Or do you celebrate the collective destruction of industry and wealth?  If you are trying to attract industries to take root in our area, are you really thinking that celebrating a communist labor union is a good enticement?  Is that a statement of support for industry?  Or is it a statement that industries better beware, that this community doesn't like wealth creation with the attached work force to go with it?  It's a choice.  When faced with a decision on what history to celebrate, would you decide to celebrate communism or a victory for human freedom? </div> <bR> <div> Lastly, I believe that if this community would take a stand for freedom, self-determination, and encouragement of wealth creation, industries would flock here.  Our unemployment rate is 14.5%?  Do you think that might have something to do with what our community supports and celebrates?  What attitudes prevail here?  What private ownership would want to buy a property in a depressed area that commemorates a communist ideology? Maybe there are some, but isn't there a conflict of purpose in this?</div> <bR> <div> If you want to find the answer to why industries are leaving the United States and why our area, in particular, is floundering, you just might want to ask yourself what ideology you are promoting. Is it Communism, or freedom; collectivism or property rights? When you realize that individuals create wealth, that freedom promotes industry, and that collectivism destroys both, maybe this small city will be able to celebrate a real and sustainable prosperity.  Until then, we are stuck in a self-defeating spiral of debt and poverty, looking for tax credits to develop property and, thereby, turning private property into a collective, communist project. Let's decide which history we defend and celebrate.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="classical_progressivism_vs__american"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Classical Progressivism vs. American Exceptionalism</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> Absorbing the news each week has become an overwhelming task, even for those of us who are avidly interested.  So much "you know what" has hit the fan this past year that freedom loving Americans can hardly know where to look to find solace.  And that's the goal believe me. Simply throw so much at the public at once that they will not have the time and resources to fight back. </div> <div> "Hide the decline" (a la Climate-gate), and hide the bills (legislation we have no part in), hide the truth behind the mask of crisis management blamed on previous administrations. It takes a lot of time and research to discover the underlying truths and schemes going on, and we are finding them in spite of complicit and propagandizing mainstream media outlets.  A majority of our citizens truly do not have the time, take the time, or do the research to find out the sources of the propaganda and lies.  What we now have in power in the Federal government is classical progressivism.  Progressive is a term that is defined by socialism, communism, fascism, and centralized power.</div> <div> Slow and methodical over the last century was the march of socialists / communists / fascists / progressives / collectivists / liberals (they have so many names it is even hard to keep up with that), until Obama's election when the gears went into overdrive.  Over-reaching is much too kind of a term to place on what has become a coup to completely over-throw the Constitution of the United States.  Prior to now it has been incremental, the slippery slope, the inch-by-inch erosion of unalienable rights.  Like a slow developing disease, they have gradually weakened the main body of the country, so as now the disease can just finish it off in big bites at a time; socialized health care, energy restrictions, political correctness, executive edicts without the consent of the governed, continual reductions of property rights, illegal immigration - amnesty, etc.</div> <div> The centralized power of the Federal government is in full tilt, while individual rights to pursue life, liberty and happiness are becoming a distant dream.  Communitarian ideology is the stepping stone to complete tyranny and, God forbid, you should speak out against this tyranny for you will be ridiculed, called a racist bigot, called an extremist, and a selfish, uncaring, undeserving idiot. </div> <bR> <div> From an editorial on Socialist education written by Paul Westonl: <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2009/10/17/socialist-propaganda-in-british-education-_-by-paul-weston" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://centurean2.wordpress.com/2009/10/"><U><U>Socialist Propaganda In British Education _ By Paul Weston… « Centurean2's Weblog</U></U></A></FONT></div> <div> "Propaganda is the most powerful tool in Socialism's obsessive quest for social control and absolute power. Fear of the state is nowhere near as powerful as love of the state, and none more so when the love is conditioned from an early age."  (Think Hitler youth)  He continues, "We have surrendered any hope of a decent future for our children and grandchildren because we do not wish to be labeled racist, intolerant, xenophobic, nationalistic, or illiberal." (Think forced "diversity," as opposed to freedom of assembly. Think forced "economic justice," "social justice,” as opposed to economic liberty and equal justice.) </div> <div> Well, I'm over the name-calling and the mockery.  I've researched and studied, and I have discovered the elitists who are trying to pull off this coup in the United States are a growing but still minority of ideologues who belong somewhere within the confines of other historical tyrants / tyrannies such as the failed states of Nazi Germany, Stalin's reign in Russia, Mao's communist elimination of millions of people, Castro, and countless others.</div> <div> The policies of our current administration are just the same, though they try to cloak them in words that don't apply to real life, facts, or historical truth.  That is what tyrants do.  They gain power by convincing a lot of people who don't know history to jump onto their corrupt repetitions of historical failures.  They either marginalize or eliminate the opposition.  They use words like "reform," "change," "hope," "power to the people," "diversity," "social justice," "sustainability," "believe," economic justice,"  "let me be perfectly clear," man-caused disaster," etc.  You get the gist.  Now, if you don't go looking behind the scenes at the players and find out what they mean by these platitudes, you will not have a clue what the real agenda is.</div> <div> The fact is that over the history of civilization, America <B>is the exception</B> to all of the failed governments and tyrannies, which have come and gone.  What make America different are the "consent of the governed," and "unalienable" rights granted by God."  We the people are supposed to hold the power over our own lives, not Barack Obama or Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, or any of the appointed Czars who are regulating without our consent.  They do not own the power.  It would be laughable that they think they do, except the situation is now too dire to be funny.</div> <div> American exceptionally represents the true "progress" over the tyrannies of the past and present, yet the Obama administration wants to use the word "progress" to downgrade America into the abyss of centralized governmental tyranny over us.  The propagandized use of words is confusing to a population who has not immersed itself in the study of history enough to understand what is being foisted upon them. </div> <div> Our country has been under assault for over a century now from "progressives," by whatever name you wish to use.  We have only held them back by snips and bits, as they ever so gradually took away our God given liberties.  But now they have a shot at the whole pie, thanks to an electorate who didn't do the research, was lied to, and didn't understand what was at stake.</div> <div> The 2010 elections are an opportunity to once again stick some fingers in the dike, but I believe it is going to take a whole lot more effort than that to save the great exception that is our America. </div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="american_absolution"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>American Absolution</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com"><U>myteapartychronicle.blogspot.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> No doubt you are seeing the same commercials on TV that I am.  You know, the ones with the ethereal sounding voices of children, the visage of celestial iconography, and the word "Hopenhagen" floating across the screen.  I wonder if many in America have any clue what the Copenhagen Treaty proposes to do to the sovereignty of the United States.</div> <div> It all looks so Madison Avenue slick, "touchy - feely", warm and fuzzy.  Intoning a chant-like mantra designed to appeal to every new-age hippie and their children whose minds are already spinning with guilt for living on the planet, these commercials are designed to make Americans think they are part of some really big worldwide hug.  A hug called the Copenhagen Treaty.  And of course, President Obama is flitting off with his entourage and huge jets to Copenhagen to put his face all over it in order to make the world believe that he is saving the planet from whom? Us! That's who.</div> <div> For over sixty years now the left-wing propagandists have been occupied with convincing Americans that we are very bad people.  Forty years ago they grabbed hold of the schools to make sure the children were taught that Americans live on stolen land, built the country using stolen labor, have an illegitimate Constitution written by nasty old white men, and have been using up the planet's resources illegitimately and unfairly.  So now we have a population of people, some left wing zealots, some indoctrinated, and some who are just too uneducated to understand, who believe America is a travesty and has no business being more successful than the rest of the world. These people have been led into a twisted guilt trip for just being American. They think Obama will absolve them of their guilt if he just goes to Copenhagen and signs away our guilt to the rest of the world and consigns us to penance payments for decades to come.</div> <bR> <div> First I want to explain what this Copenhagen Treaty says and means, just so you know [<FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#0000FF" FACE="Arial" ><A HREF="http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/power_derives_from_lawful_auth.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/p"><U><U>American Thinker: Power Derives from Lawful Authority</U></U></A></FONT>].</div> <div> The proposed treaty authorizes the establishment of a "government" to transfer wealth from industrial nations to non-industrial nations in payment of a "climate debt", which the treaty declares industrial nations should pay for their burning of carbon-based fuels. The newly created international government is to have the authority to decide issues relating to carbon emissions in signatory nations, the power to levy carbon taxes on signatory nations and the power to enforce its levies without reference to the will of the people who live in the signatory nations.</div> <bR> <div> Thus, the proposed Climate Change Treaty demands that:</div> <bR> <div>     * An unelected international government is to be established without the American people voting on its establishment or membership.</div> <div>     * The unelected international government is to have authority to legislate how much and what kind of carbon-based activity Americans may engage in before they will be taxed on such activity.</div> <div>     * The unelected international government is to have authority to decide the amount of taxes Americans must pay for carbon-based activities, determine the people to whom the taxes will be given, and decide how those people will spend the taxes -- and none of those activities will be subject to presidential veto, congressional oversight, or review by the federal Judiciary, much less a vote by the American people;</div> <div>     * If the American people fail to abide by the legislative edicts of the unelected international government, they will be subject to international enforcement proceedings that are alien to our constitutional ideas of due process, equal protection, personal freedom and property rights.</div> <div> So, Obama wants to sign a treaty that gives some panel, not authorized by the people of the United States, the power to tax Americans and dictate to Americans just how much energy Americans are allowed to consume for their businesses and their lives.  Somehow I'm not feeling the love here.  Did Americans knowingly elect a President to sign away American sovereignty and the U.S. Constitution?  Did Barack Obama not take the oath to support, defend, and uphold the U.S. Constitution?  (The oath was botched and he was subjected to a do-over, as I recall) </div> <div> And if this isn't bad enough, did Americans actually do anything to worsen the condition of planet earth in the past forty years?</div> <div> Emails revealed last week from the Climatic Research Unit in Britain proved that the scientists feeding information to the United Nations' International Panel on Climate Change had been manipulating evidence, hiding the truth, and laughing all the way to the bank for years.  This information finally shows that lying to get funding research was the norm.  It also shows that the assertion that man is to blame for some radical shift in the climate is absurd.  It finally exposes the hoax for what it is.  It finally exposes Al Gore for what he is, a very clever snake oil salesman who also has been laughing all the way to the bank.  The entire reason for the IPCC, the Kyoto Treaty, and the Copenhagen Treaty has been a virtual shakedown of advanced industrial nations. </div> <div> And finally, this email chain of evidence proves that Americans are not to blame for ruining anyone's planet.  While America's population has risen over the past twenty years, our output of pollution has gone down.  There is no reason for Americans to feel guilty or pay through the nose for some false data put together by some extortionists for their own gain.  Americans can hold their heads up and stop feeling as if we are some type of scourge on the earth.  Americans can be proud of their track record on pollution and stewardship of the earth.  America is not a "problem" and should not be held hostage to some ridiculous ransom.</div> <div> Obama needs to get off the Climate Change train because it is heading for a very big crash.  And frankly, I think, so is he.  The lies are not "sustainable."</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="on_the_general_welfare"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>On the General Welfare</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <div> <A HREF="http://myteapartychonicle.blogspot.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://myteapartychonicle.blogspot.com"><U>myteapartychonicle.blogspot.com</U></A></div> <bR> <div> The power brokers in Congress and Barrack Obama are hell-bent on convincing the American public that they have the right to enact health care and energy mandates based on the General Welfare reference in the U.S. Constitution. As usual they are abusing their power and misusing the language of the Constitution to suit their own greed, and twisting words to confuse an uneducated public into becoming dependent on the federal government in ways the founders never intended.  This is tragic and a travesty against the very core of our basic rights. </div> <div> The General Welfare reference in the U.S. Constitution was meant ONLY to provide support for the individual States, to have national defense and provide a basis for the States to be able to conduct their own affairs. In the Federalist Papers, Federalist No. 14, James Madison wrote, “. . . the general [federal] government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws. Its jurisdiction is limited to certain enumerated objects . . .” </div> <div> In fact, the entire purpose of the U.S. Constitution, with deliberate enumerated powers, is to protect Americans from the exact oppression that the current administration is trying to impose on us.  Nowhere in the Constitution does the President or the Congress have any of the powers they have usurped with regard to mandates over-riding the jurisdiction of the States. </div> <div> So what recourse actions do the citizens have when the federal government becomes Jabba the Hut? At this point I'm not sure if there is recourse.  Liberals/Communists/Socialists/Progressives have infiltrated most of the education system and indoctrinated three or more generations of students into the "dependent on government" mindset. Fifty-six members of Congress are proud card-carrying members of the Socialist Party. Both Republicans and Democrats have abandoned the U.S. Constitution for the sake of buying votes and padding their own bank accounts.  The corruption is massive.  The Constitution has been subverted for decades and the population is now at the mercy of treasonous politicians, whose agenda is not supporting and defending the U.S. Constitution, but solidifying their own money machines and power bases.</div> <div> Elections come and go.  The one true thing you can say is that elections have consequences.  Americans need to get smart really fast and figure out how to survive the consequences of tyranny.  While we have incrementally been losing freedoms for a very long time, the current administration is wrapping us up in chains and promising to never allow us to be free people again.  Your health, your energy use, your ability to communicate, your money system, your ability to move about, your opportunity to buy property, all of this is now being taken away from you and placed under the iron thumb of the federal government. </div> <div> When Obama said he was going to "transform" America, he wasn't kidding.  The question that needed to be asked was, "To what?"  Now you know.  His answer to all things is domination by federal government in all aspects of your life.  The irony is that, because of very clever rhetoric, Obama convinced a lot of people that the transformation was going to return America to its original intent.  The people who were fed up with government corruption voted for him thinking they were going to get a more transparent and purely American administration.  What we got instead was a Chicago style mafia, complete with Communist thugs, taking over every private industry in our country.  A very clever ruse indeed.  He could get a Nobel Prize for pulling the wool over people's eyes, if there were one. </div> <div> Your liberty was guaranteed by the Constitution, not your health care or your energy usage. "The people are the natural guardians of the Constitution," according to Alexander Hamilton.  It is now up to us to defend it from the power mad in our government.  Call congress and exert your natural rights to defend the Constitution.  Tell them, NO, NO, NO on both Obamacare and Cap and Trade.  If we don't stop them, the general welfare for all of us is lost.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_price_of_everything__the_value_of"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Price of Everything; the Value of Nothing</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <bR> <div> In Obamaland, nothing is out of reach for anyone, at least not according to him. Everything is available to everyone. Houses. Cars. Health Care. You want it . . . we can afford it, according to our messiah. So how do things get priced in an era where everyone gets everything? Arbitrarily, it would appear. This year alone, the price has gone to 1.4 trillion in additional debt on our backs.</div> <div> There is a slight problem with this. The value of the dollar is now tanking due to the Obama money policies. Simply stated, it's going to take more dollars to buy anything while the value of everything goes down.</div> <div> So let's say you get an $8,000.00 credit (first time buyers only) to buy a house. What the house was worth last year is now anywhere from 11 to 25% less than it was, thanks to the mortgage debacle set up by Congress, Carter and Clinton, called the Community Reinvestment Act. You just lost somewhere between $16,000.00 and $35,000.00 in value on the house. The $8,000.00 the Feds are giving away doesn't come close to what they took away from you. Furthermore, the $8,000.00 is coming out of taxpayers' pockets. So, not only did you lose the value of your house, but you lose the taxes that are now paying for some other person's house. And even one thing more, the $8,000.00 isn't worth what it was a year ago, due to the maniacal printing of gobs of money to supply the Federal debt.</div> <div> Hmmm . . . let's take another one. You are now owners of car companies that you, as taxpayers, had no intention of buying. Your taxes are being used to build cars you will never be able to afford, thanks to the likes of Al Gore and his Finnish car company that you also subsidize. You see, your Federal Government just granted a half billion dollar loan to Mr. Gore's Finnish car company to build a $90,000.00 sports car that will go 50 miles on a battery charge. What is the value of that to the American taxpayer? Somehow I think the value of that one landed in Gore's lap and you paid the price for it.</div> <div> How many $90,000.00 sports cars are you going to buy in this lifetime? The price is high to you and the value is nothing to you.  Research and development? You couldn't do that in the U.S. without involving Al Gore? Political payback is expensive. This is on top of the union jobs in the U.S. car industry for which you are paying, too.</div> <div> Now you are about to get hit for health care. Supposedly the price of health care is going to go down. So says the stated goal. When did you last pay less money and get more for it? Walmart? Cheap goods from China? Just on the merits, I cannot imagine that anyone in this country thinks that the quality of health care is going to either be as good as it is, or go up, while prices go down.</div> <div> This is about your personal body, folks. How much is it worth? And do you really think that taking on all of the extra people this health care is supposed to cover is going to cost less out of your pocket? Factually, this is not possible unless you diminish the quality for all of us. And, just like the mortgage credit, the money is going to come from you. Are you willing to give up quality health care to pay for poor health care for everyone? Or do you actually think you are not going to pay that price?</div> <div> Demand will go up and supply will go down or stay the same. That in itself usually pushes prices up. But the Federal Government wants to push prices down by artificial means, just like they pushed the demand up and the mortgage prices down in the housing industry. Look where that got us. They are in the process of creating another bubble, this time in the business of your private personal health care.</div> <div> The only fair arbiter of prices is supply and demand. American success was built on this premise and has been undermined by the Federal Government incrementally for years. Obama and the Federal Government are in the business of meddling, redistribution, and paying back political constituencies for votes. They are playing high stakes poker and your life is in the pot.</div> <div> The value of your life and your property are being determined by insidious means that increase the price of everything and devalue all that you are and have worked to gain. Bubbles are being blown to enrich some political buddies and you are being had in the process. Just like the Cash for Clunkers bubble burst in short order, just like the mortgage crisis bubble burst after being blown up for years and years, the health care bubble will burst in the same way. And who will pay the price? Your children and your children's children, that's who!</div> <div> Quality American health care will be ancient history. This will further bankrupt our country, which is already bankrupted thanks to the previous bubbles of social programs and centralized government. Seems to me Obama knows the price of everything, but he knows the value of nothing. That's why his sales pitches sound so hollow. He is selling a pig in a poke, a value of nothing with a very high price attached.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="health_care___energy_monopoly__"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Health Care & Energy Monopoly = Obamanopoly</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <bR> <div> Like most American school children growing up in the 50's and 60's, I was taught that Teddy Roosevelt was some kind of hero for "trust busting" and killing the monopolies. The example most often given was the Rockefeller stranglehold on oil and coal production . . . and that the Rockefellers had ruthlessly ruined their competitors and attained an energy monopoly. It's a compelling story because the Rockefeller brothers actually did some horrendous things to kill off the competition. Laws did need to be made to protect people from such actions.</div> <div> That seemed pretty good to me . . . I was told that Roosevelt had busted up the monopolies, spurred competition and saved capitalism. Hmmm . . . maybe that was too simplistic, but it worked for school children and reinforced the idea that America was a place where everyone could have an opportunity to compete in the marketplace. Good thing, no?? Well, not quite.</div> <div> The other two things we learned about TR were that he was the father of the "progressive income tax" and that he started the National Park system. All of this was taught as if TR was our hero.</div> <div> I'm older and wiser now. I have a more educated view on our government than I did as a young student. And I have a more in depth understanding of the U.S. Constitution than I had then (this reminds me to remind you . . . beware of the Obama indoctrination taking place in our schools . . . it is hideous and extremely bad for young minds who are supposed to be learning ABC's, Three R's, and critical thinking.)</div> <div> "In the political sphere, Progressivism is a synonym for socialism, and for our sect called liberalism. Socialism necessitates collectivized power at the highest levels of the political state, leaving open a pathway to totalitarianism. Teddy Roosevelt was the first President to march along that pathway. According to the blog, <I>the View from 1776, “</I>Bloody rotten news, frankly. Looks like we have been on this path since 1901, so 108 years of this has shaken the foundations to the core.”</div> <div> A federal income tax is unconstitutional, period. It involves confiscation of property by the government. (Even so, most states would agree to Federal income tax for limited reasons; national defense, protecting the borders, and preservation of the interstate highways for the sake of commerce.) The "Progressive" income tax is nothing more than class warfare and wealth distribution, which Obama likes to promote. And getting to the point of Health Care, taxing us for health care is one more thing that is unconstitutional. Teddy would be proud, along with Franklin and Eleanor, and all of the collectivists who have come since them. We've been fighting an internal parasite for 108 years (and more) and I believe we are now in critical condition. The moment of truth has come.</div> <div> The federal government is setting itself up as a monopoly with Obama's very clever edicts and his adept, sidestepping, corrupt czars. One example is the shut down of charter schools using vouchers in the DC area. Another example is the coming attempt by the FCC "diversity czar" to shut down free speech. Another example is the government ownership of car manufacturers funded with our tax dollars. Another example is government ownership of banks, also using our tax dollars. The czars have regulatory power to impose restrictions and confiscate tax money for their pet causes, i.e. redistribution of wealth for “green” stuff, restricting free speech, putting energy monitors on your homes, extracting tax money for indoctrinating school children, etc. etc.</div> <div> Obamanopoly is the result, a term I see now frequently on the web. I can't take credit for it, but I think the word is totally apropos.</div> <div> The only true monopolies are government entities, i.e. public schools, mandated utilities, etc. Breaking up private monopolies is just a ruse for creating the mother of all monopolies . . . the Federal Government. Next up is Obamanopoly Health Care. After that comes Obamanopoly Energy Police. Obamanopoly is totalitarianism at its core.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="you_thought_you_knew_the_news"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>You Thought You Knew the News</div> <div> By Cheryl Pass</div> <bR> <div> Vociferous voices on the left over the last several years have ranted and raved about the so-called corruption of profit making capitalistic ventures, as if the idea of making a living from a profitable business is an evil consort with the devil. Those "evil profiteers" are the scourge of the earth, as portrayed by such people as the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, who recently proclaimed the insurance companies as "evil" for making profits. (Her family's net worth is somewhere between $15 and $55 million USD. and she owns shares in energy companies, which will gain "profits" under the Cap & Trade bill). </div> <div> How many times over the past several years have you heard the mainstream media and congress bash the oil companies for making profits? Here's a fact you should know: Oil companies make 13 cents per gallon of gasoline sold in California while government makes 58 cents per gallon. In other words, government makes four times the profit that oil companies make with none of the investment risk.</div> <div> The voices on the left want you to think that they are taking the profits out of government and decimating those dastardly special interest groups who "profit" from government. They want you to think they are doing this for your benefit. This is a blatant lie. I blame journalists for throwing away their ethical obligation to bring you unbiased news reporting. But journalism has been sold out. In fact, the whole of journalism has been usurped by leftist profiteers. Their message is so corrupt that the public is kept in the dark, not knowing whom to believe.</div> <div> So who is corrupting journalism while making profits from news? I would point to the most obvious perpetrator, General Electric, which owns MSNBC. By lying to the public to get Obama elected, GE is getting government contracts and various other gratuities to build green energy facilities and make huge profits from the government.</div> <div> “Great,” you say, “that's better than Halliburton making money from wars.”</div> <div> You're missing the point. You were lied to so government can play the corporate corruption game. On one hand, Halliburton was out-sourced by the U.S. government to defend the nation. On the other hand, GE is out-sourced using public money to make your energy prices higher and higher. You may not care about defending the nation, but do you care if you are lied to in order to enrich a corporation that makes your energy prices unaffordable? Cap and Trade will benefit GE but make life harder for everyone else, including the poorest Americans who won't be able to pay the higher energy prices.</div> <div> Environmentalists demand that you make a deal with the devil. Did MSNBC explain that to you?</div> <div> Yet another example of who is behind this journalistic bombast of lies is a profiteer couple named Herbert and Marion Sandler. You may not have heard of them because they are part of the "behind the scenes" operation funding the Democrat/Socialist Party. The Sandlers are former chief executives of Golden West, which they sold to Wachovia for $26 billion USD. They personally made around $2.4 billion from the deal. Analysts blame the near failure of Wachovia on the Sandlers' mortgage policies, which mirrored the failed practices of the CRA (Credit Reinvestment Act).</div> <div> The Sandlers made their billions from the Fannie and Freddie government policies constructed by the left with your tax dollars. Recently the Sandlers have donated to and operate a non-profit journalistic venture called ProPublica, supposedly an investigative journalism organization. They have committed $10 million USD to ProPublica and Mr. Sandler serves as chairman. The Sandlers are major donors to the Democratic Party and are top funders of ACORN, MoveOne.org, the American Civil Liberties Union and other far-leftist groups like Human Rights Watch. Along with George Soros, they are among the top three contributors to the Democrat Party.</div> <div> “So what,” you say.</div> <div> Well, the Associated Press has announced that its subscribers can publish work by ProPublica and three other leftist organizations without charge. 1500 American newspapers are subscribers to AP. Folks, AP used to be a respected news source. Now AP has decided to give you more left-wing, socialist bias and more unethically bent reporting.</div> <div> Why would you believe anything you read in any AP report from this day forward? You know from the outset that it is coming from the Democrat Party, Soros & Co., John Podesta, MoveOn.org, ACORN, and others who have no interest in ethical journalism. Their interest is in twisting the truth to make you believe their lies. Their interest is in eliminating the United States Constitution and national sovereignty, replacing it with global interests. Oh, and they like seeing your taxes fund pet projects from which they make "obscene" profit through government policies.</div> <bR> <div> What about that sweet fellow, Al Gore? He is saving the planet for you and your children, right? He left government with under $1 million USD in 2000. He is now worth in excess of $120 million USD, thanks to MoveOn.org (brought to you by George Soros and the Sandlers) and the media reporting his lies on climate change, formerly known as Global Warming, which was once called global cooling.</div> <div> His connections to MoveOn.org are common knowledge. Now do you see who is "profiteering" from our government and your taxes? Now do you see who is lying to you to further their own selfish agenda? And do you really think this is some altruistic, utopian Democrat Party that only wants great things for you and your life? Can you believe AP? Hmmm . . . I don't think so.</div> <div> So ask yourself why the media is attacking Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh. Ask yourself who is really getting rich from media propaganda. An uninformed and misinformed public is the best friend of the left. Live it, love it, and eat it for breakfast with your morning newspaper.</div> <div> Read Marx's "Communist Manifesto" for lunch. And read Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" for dinner. Read George Orwell or Ayn Rand before bedtime. Keep the U.S. Constitution with you at all times. You will see things a lot clearer . . . unless you are lazy and you really don't care what disasters are lying ahead for you and your children.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="what_does_it_mean_to_be_a__real"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>What does it mean to be a “Real American?”</div> <div> By Cheryl A. Pass</div> <bR> <div> It comes to my attention through the media coverage the last several years that both sides of the political spectrum in the U.S. claim the "real American" title. And each side demonizes the other for being un-American. Politicians will stand up in front of crowds and claim that their way is the American way, that they have the true interest of Americans at heart, that it is un-American to allow people and companies to fail, un-American to have a segment of poor among us.</div> <div> The President himself prefaces statements by saying that he is a Constitutional scholar and that his policies are "American." I find that to be jabberwocky, intended to pull in uneducated people who really are clueless on the tenets of the U.S. Constitution.</div> <div> To be fair, both parties are claiming the "real American" label when, in fact, both parties have been passing laws that are completely un-American, antithetical to the U.S. Constitution.</div> <div> I have made some statements that I believe the political leftists, the Democrats, and the Obama administration is un-American. When I say this, know that I am saying that they are tearing down our Constitution. In fact, I believe that they are MORE un-American than the Republicans. But both are working against the Constitution to suit their own political gain. I do believe that more Republicans are Constitutionalists than those who reside on the political left. In short, one is worse than the other . . . but both can play this game.</div> <div> There are people in this country calling themselves "American" who either don't know the Constitution or don't care about it because they want the government to hand them benefits from other peoples' labors. I do not believe these people are “real Americans" and I am not afraid to say so. I would politely call them "pretenders," but the situation has now gotten much direr than that would imply. The situation we face today is sinister, nothing less.</div> <div> The first thing you need to know is that the only thing that is "American" is the U.S. Constitution. That document is the one thing that makes us "American." All of the other claims of Americanism, made by politicians who are intent on micro-managing our personal lives, are bogus.</div> <div> Forced diversity is not American. Affirmative Action is not American. Social Security is not American. Medicare and Medicaid are not American. Being American means believing in the U.S. Constitution as the one and only manual for our government. All we need to do is stick to it.</div> <div> The problem we are having over the Health Care debate, as well as the Cap and Tax proposals, and even the Cash for Clunkers bill, is that none of these ideas fit into the U.S. Constitution. The bailouts of the banks, the TARP, the Stimulus Bill, all are completely unconstitutional. No Child Left Behind and the Prescription Drug Bill are completely unconstitutional. The Federal Reserve is unconstitutional.</div> <div> The government of the United States is full of people who are doing things for selfish purposes and not adhering to their oath to support and uphold the Constitution. What does it mean when the oath taken says you will “defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic?” How does that oath hold up when those who take that oath are undermining the Constitution themselves? That oath has become a joke in our current government.</div> <div> In the history of civilization, tragically, there have always been poor people. What is different about being "American" is that the U.S. Constitution created a larger middle class and millions of people who have had the opportunity to rise out of that poverty.</div> <div> From a world perspective, America has been more successful at giving the poor opportunities that do not exist in other government structures. And while that is due in part to capitalism, it is due mostly to the Constitution that insures individual property rights, the rights to own the fruit of your own labors, and the pursuit of happiness. The most important rights included in the Constitution guarantee that you own your person and the gains of your hard work. That is the key to the success of America.</div> <div> No one can doubt that the Democrat Party has become more socialistic. And they have taken power with chips on their shoulders, social engineers who, evidently, aren't satisfied with opportunity for all. They don't want opportunity. They say they want egalitarian results for each life. That, in itself is completely antithetical to being "American." It is also an unachievable myth.</div> <div> What they really want is the game rigged in favor of government officials, so that individuals lose their Constitutional rights of owning themselves and are forced into giving away their opportunities, their ownership rights, their wages, and literally their own person-hoods to everyone else. Communes anyone??? In their utopian schemes, the individual owes the government (the collective) his or her life. There is nothing "American" about this.</div> <div> So the next time you hear some politician proclaim they are proposing something "American," I suggest you make them pass the Constitutional test.</div> <div> They may argue, "America must do this because we look bad to the rest of the world if we don't." Huh? Or they say things like, "My way is the American way," when in fact it isn't at all. Ask yourself if the proposal is consistent with the rights guaranteed in the Constitution? Or is it some convenient hand-out to buy off the special interests and voters?</div> <div> Our country was not built on collectivism. Our country was not created to take from the rich and give to the poor. Our country was created to give everyone the opportunity to reach their own potential. If one person's potential is “X” and another person's potential is “Y”, that is O.K. Rigging the system with government intervention is exactly what has been wrecking the system, taking “X” and “Y” down with it. Why would anyone want more of that? But that is what the last election brought us . . . more expanded unconstitutional government intervention brought to you by special interests and politicians who are rigging the system.</div> <div> If you believe in and support the U.S. Constitution you are a "real American." If you don't, then stop the meaningless proclamations. You are making liars of yourselves.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="the_curious_case_of_mr__bing"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>The Curious Case of Mr. Bing</div> <div> by Cheryl A. Pass</div> <bR> <div> I was just wondering about that gorgeous jet that brought the two so called journalists back from North Korea yesterday. It occurred to me that if this was a state department operation to retrieve the two women from the clutches of Kim Jong Il, why was the plane not a U.S. military plane? A new name popped up when I went looking for the answer: Steve Bing.</div> <div> So who is Steve Bing? According to American Thinker, Mr. Bing is one of the wealthy elite backers of the now Communist Democrat Party. You can read the entire article here: http:www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/08/guess_whose_jet.html. But here are some of the highlights.</div> <div> "He provided the airplane that flew the Clinton team in and out, with the journalists in tow on the way back."</div> <div> "Steve Bing is heir to a large real estate fortune and produces forgettable, inane movies. But, more importantly, he is (along with George Soros) one of the prime funders of 527 groups in America. These are often partisan groups posing as "activist" groups-and contributions to them are tax-deductible (though they should not be when such groups engage in politics; the IRS has never scrutinized these groups-and they certainly will not do so under Barrack Obama who relied on them to win the Presidency). MoveOn.Org is a 527 group, for example."</div> <div> More on Bing from Discover The Networks: http://discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2134</div> <div> "Today he is a close friend and associate of the billionaire financier George Soros."</div> <div> "A notorious playboy and tabloid magnet, Bing is deeply devoted to the Democratic Party and its affiliated causes. In 1998 he ranked as the 13th leading campaign donor to the Democrats. Beyond contributing $759,000 to assist individual Democratic candidates in the late 1990s, Bing provided $1 million to help bankroll the party's 2000 national convention. During the 2000 election cycle, he gave $200,000 to Democratic nominee Al Gore's presidential campaign. A report by the Center for Public Integrity further found that, between August 2000 and August 2004, Bing wrote checks totaling $15,382,555 to pro-Democratic `Section 527 organizations,' tax-exempt activist groups unofficially allied with the Democratic Party (for instance, the MoveOn Voter Fund), making Bing the third leading contributor to the Democratic party behind George Soros and Progressive Corp Chairman Peter Lewis."</div> <div> You can also find out more on Mr. Bing at: Discover The Networks</div> <div> So who actually owns the United States of America today?  The Democrat Party is a front group for a Shadow Government.  David Horowitz wrote a book not too long ago exposing this take-over of our country.  And, no, I haven't started wearing a tin foil hat.  However, I might be proud to be called a "bitter clinger."</div> <div> We have suffered what is known as a "bloodless coup."  Soros & Co. own the Democrat Party.  Soros & Co. money bought the media.  Soros & Co. money has infiltrated every branch of government. Unions and communists have taken over the public schools (and you wonder why the schools are producing such unintelligent students). The left wing political elites now own the banks and the car companies.</div> <div> They are in the process of trying to grab our health care and our energy supplies. The front men are Obama and his czars. But you need to keep asking who is behind this and why. And you need to keep asking your friends if they are willing to fight for our Constitution and win our country back from these diabolical snakes. </div> <div> The Democrat Party is not what your grandparents thought it was. The Democrat Party has long leaned toward Socialist ideology and now, after years of infiltration, it is completely off the charts into Communism, Collectivism, Marxism, Fascism, and all things un-American.</div> <div> And yes, I do mean un-American.  The rights of the individual are assaulted on all fronts by this government.  The Constitution is a mere memory. The freedoms we used to know have gradually eroded for years. Then, poof!! They are gone in 60 seconds with one very corrupt election.</div> <div> So now you know whose plane brought back Al Gore's flunkies.  What you don't know is what quid pro quo was exacted for their release, what America paid to prop up Kim Jong Il in the process. </div> <div> Even Ian Fleming couldn't write this stuff.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div> (This column originally appeared on Daria DiGiovanni's blog, <A HREF="http://palin-drone.blogspot.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://palin-drone.blogspot.com/"><U>http://palin-drone.blogspot.com/</U></A>.)</div> <div> <FONT SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" > <A NAME="an_encounter_with_the_unhinged"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></FONT>An Encounter with the Unhinged: Patriots vs. MoveOn, ACORN, Obama-bots Outside of Senator Nelson's Office </div> <div> by Daria DiGiovanni</div> <bR> <div> “We are proud communists!” </div> <div> So screeched a rather large, militant gentleman (yes, I use the term loosely) when confronted with a gathering of patriots outside of Senator Bill Nelson’s office in Davie, FL today. Sadly, he was not alone in his sentiment; the MoveOn.org, ACORN and Barack Obama’s “Organizing for Healthcare” protestors were angrily out-of-the-Karl-Marx closet and more than willing to shout it to the world. </div> <div> Steeped in leftist ideology, their ranks included an unhinged young school teacher who claimed she’s lived in Italy, France and Canada, and can thus attest to the superiority of their systems; the aforementioned stout man who also announced that he’d actually contemplated committing suicide to make his point about the urgency of the situation (no, really!); and a smug, self-important college professor who looked like he was straight out of Woodstock with his grey ponytail and Baby Boomer (my apologies to patriotic Boomers everywhere!) arrogance. Upon arriving on the scene, he immediately got in our faces and began yelling about “evil Republicans.” </div> <div> Not sure where this guy gets his news, but he actually had the audacity to suggest that our side (among whose ranks were my dear friends Elaine Laffey and Jessica Johnson-Dornblaser) was filled with paid volunteers! Uh, no. That would be ACORN and MoveOn.org, pal. Does the name George Soros ring a bell?</div> <div> When Elaine and I attempted to reason with the suicide proponent, he was actually thrilled about the Draconian provision in the bill that would require senior citizens to go for “counseling” every five years to learn how to die. I mean this man resonated with absolute jubilation over the prospect of coercing people to choose death over life! </div> <div> As for the practically hyperventilating school teacher, when I rightfully pointed out the need for tort reform, and the complicity of the trial lawyers and their unholy alliance with the Democrat Party – a union that is one of the biggest contributors to high insurance costs (along with skyrocketing malpractice rates) -- she condescendingly retorted that such realities are a “minor” part of the problem. Isn’t it comforting to know she’s brainwashing the next generation?</div> <div> It is quite eye-opening to realize we share this country with so many misinformed, delusional people whose motto could be "My mind is made up; please don't confuse me with the facts." I remember that slogan from tee-shirts on some of the New Jersey boardwalks, and it is an appropriate fit for the people we met today. Elaine encountered this in action when she politely laid out some hard truths about the bill to a woman who at first pretended to be interested in real debate. However, right in the middle of Elaine’s run-down, she turned on her heel and strode away. My mind is made up; please don’t confuse me with the facts.</div> <div> And let’s talk about reverse racism for a moment, shall we? My friend Jessica got into a debate with a young black woman who made the blanket assumption that because Jess happens to be white, she is a child of privilege. I believe her accusations were something along the lines of “Sure you like the free market; you can afford any plan you want!” Jessica calmly stuck to the facts and queried as to how much this woman knew about the proposed legislation. For example, was she aware that the public option really isn’t an “option” at all, because if for any reason you decided to change your private insurance, you’d be forced into the government plan?” Of course, this woman knew nothing about that, but hey, if it comes from Obama it must be good, right?</div> <div> Typically, none of them knew what was in the bill when pressed by any member of the patriot resistance. And not surprisingly, not one of them carried an American flag. They did however, break out into enthusiastic chants of "Obama" !</div> <div> We of course, countered with "USA"! I had to keep reminding myself that "we surround them", to quote Glenn Beck. I have to admit though, when you come face to face with such willful, belligerent ignorance, it is rather disturbing. Hearing them chant his name over and over and confronting the stark realities of the consequences of the 60's decade was like being in a really bad science fiction film.</div> <div> Unfortunately these people exist, as do teachers such as the young woman I described. I shudder to think of her in action in the classroom, eagerly and systematically brainwashing the next generation. If ever there was a living, breathing argument in favor of home-schooling, she’s it. She’s also a testament to the dire need to get government out of the business of education, though that’s a post for another day. Were I fortunate enough to have children, I’d definitely take the home-schooling route if unable to send them to a Catholic or private school. </div> <div> One thing I must report: unlike Congressman Wexler’s office, Nelson’s Davie location is in a strip-mall, and much more accessible to the public. And perhaps because they knew his supporters would also be there, Nelson’s staff was at least polite, allowing us to fill out forms in which we expressed our opposition to Obamacare. I was very deliberate about listing all of the free-market solutions on mine, from the ability to purchase insurance across state lines to the need for tax credits for small business owners. Unlike their lemmings, Nelson, Obama and the Democrats would do well to realize that they are dealing with informed, intelligent and independent people when engaging the opposition. If he dares reply to me with a condescending letter insulting my intelligence, he will definitely hear from me again. No one argues that there is a need for reform; but the free market is the solution, not another government takeover. Didn’t Fannie and Freddie prove that once and for all? </div> <div> Finally, thank God for all of the wonderful Tea Party Patriots, 9/12 activists and other concerned citizens we rallied with today, one of whom was a gentleman from Cuba who passionately and relentlessly argued with just about every one of them. Though some felt it was futile and possibly even hurtful to our cause, I admire his guts and determination. If only more Americans possessed the same spirit and love of freedom!</div> <div> Stay in the fight, people! Keep talking, keep protesting, keep calling Congress and keep working to get the USA back to Constitutional principles. This is it! And we can do it!</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="celebrating_dependence_day"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Celebrating Dependence Day</div> <div> by Cheryl Pass</div> <bR> <div> As the Fourth of July approaches I am finding myself perplexed at the idea of celebrating a non sequitur. The day which brought independence to a nation of self-reliant people because of the freedom it promised is now gone. The dregs are left along with a few patriots who still think independence is a good thing. The reasons for celebration are lying on the ash heap of history. The day seems more like a funeral this year than a celebration of anything.</div> <div> Evidence of this non sequitur came this week in a pamphlet from the City of Gastonia. The pamphlet is entitled, "Good News" and is brought to us in our utility bill. The entire front page is devoted to federal stimulus money being divvied up in Gastonia as if it is Manna from Heaven. The author of this front page announcement is none other than our city manager, Jim Palenick. The article touts the $6.5 million in funds that our fair city is being granted from the federal government. Aren't you deliriously happy?</div> <div> Independence Day was all about self-reliance. It was a commemoration of all that is good about freedom from oppression and being able, without government oppression, to take care of yourself and your own. We are a far cry from that freedom and self-reliance when an oppressive government puts entire towns and an entire population on the dependent list. As I read about all of the money coming into Gastonia, I thought about every town in America being usurped by a federal government gone amok.</div> <div> First the federal government and the states created policies which have undermined the free enterprise of this country through heavy regulations, taxation, illegal immigration, disallowing energy independence, and generally wrecking any semblance of sanity and common sense when it comes to fiscal policies. Then, to make sure every citizen gets the point, congress keeps passing more inane laws in order to create more dependence on the government and whip Americans into line. And the local politicians, wanting to get on the bandwagon, do more of the same. They grab the power by legislating your dependence and your unwilling cooperation.</div> <div> So now we have $2.1 million dollars of federal money to "redevelop" a building downtown, create condominiums, and redevelop other neglected properties. We have over $2 million of federal money to purchase new hybrid buses. Federal money to buy police cars. Federal money for landscaping along the insane "Thread Trail," which is some conjured up way to pretend we are celebrating a textile industry that the government has near annihilated.</div> <div> People in Wyoming are paying for Gastonia's wish list. People in Gastonia are paying for some other city in some other state's wish list. In short, no city, county, or state is apparently immune from becoming the beggar to the all, omnipresent federal government.</div> <div> And this has nothing to do with real need. It has everything to do with need created by government officials. It has everything to do with political power over our lives. This is the very antithesis of what the Fourth of July is supposed to celebrate, the marker of our freedoms. Freedoms that have been thrown out of the window because some greedy politician or city manager wants to tell you they took money from the federal coffers to landscape your downtown. And that is supposed to make you happy?</div> <div> We have "Movies on Main." We have "Rock the Avenue." What we really have are circuses and games to keep Gastonians distracted while politicians are busy taking away your economic liberty. Note in this Sunday's Gazette that five businesses within a block on Union Road are all going under. More unemployment results while we are "enjoying" that federal money.</div> <div> Dependence used to be either a sign of extreme disability or carried the shame of laziness. Self-reliance was a banner of pride and with it came the safety and confidence to know you are not depending on a totalitarian to run your life. Today, our city is waving an American flag proudly proclaiming its dependence, not its independence. This is a sad turn for Americans.</div> <div> It is no badge of courage to become dependent on the federal government or the state for anything. The very same government oppression received from King George has reared its ugly head in the form of American government wearing the costume and mask of a benevolent dictator. And believe me, there is no such thing as a "benevolent dictator." Blood spilled, lives given in the quest for liberty, independence won, but all given up for some federal, state, and local programs you don't need, while your jobs and economic freedom have been forcefully taken from you.</div> <div> So enjoy that new landscaping, downtown development and city buses. The price you have paid is higher than you think. Happy Dependence Day, Gastonia!</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="female_jealousy_and_sarah_palin"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Female Jealousy and Sarah Palin</div> <div> By Daria DiGiovanni</div> <bR> <div> If the comments on <A HREF="http://www.facebook.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.facebook.com/"><U>Facebook</U></A> and the attacks by both <A HREF="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/30/quote-of-the-day-521/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/30/qu"><U>"GOP strategists" and former McCain staffers </U></A>are any indication, jealousy is a pervasive, ugly and -- possibly -- <I>incurable </I>disease. Let's examine some of the critiques of Palin by fellow women; I am not talking about the far-left NOW types, but females who claim to be Republican and/or conservative.</div> <div> Last night on <A HREF="http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly"><U>The O'Reilly Factor</U></A>, guest host Monica Crowley interviewed a "GOP strategist" named <A HREF="http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/06/attention-jennifer-millerwise-dyck.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/"><U>Jennifer Millerwise Dyck </U></A>about the repulsive <A HREF="http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGJiMTYyMzU3ZmE3NDIxNGI2ZjU1N2VhMWQxODE3ODU=" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/p"><U>Vanity Fair hit-job </U></A>on Governor Palin. Normally an excellent challenger, Crowley unfortunately dropped the ball when Millerwise Dyck claimed that Governor Palin should stop engaging in "wars of words" with David Letterman and instead focus on energy issues and the business of her state. Ms. Millerwise Dyck is flat-out wrong on so many levels, it is hard to know where to start.</div> <div> I suppose the fact that Governor Palin's <A HREF="http://www.newsminer.com/weblogs/dermot-cole/2009/jun/11/exxon-transcanada-announce-deal/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.newsminer.com/weblogs/dermot-"><U>natural gas pipeline </U></A>victory-“an historic achievement," to quote Palin directly-is of no consequence to out-of-touch Beltway types, nor is her recent visit to Kosovo and address to <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtt3b9kitK0" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtt3b9kit"><U>Camp Bondsteel </U></A>soldiers an example of credible leadership and foreign diplomacy. During the interview last night, I waited for Crowley to rebut Millerwise Dyck with both of these examples, but unfortunately she chose not to do so. </div> <div> Then there's the matter of Palin's <A HREF="http://www.runnersworld.com/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.runnersworld.com/"><U>Runner's World </U></A>magazine interview, which seems to have ticked off more than one alleged conservative female, at least on Facebook. One would think the Governor of Alaska had posed on a beach in a string bikini, or in a centerfold in Playboy the way some of these females are carrying on. Of course, these women do so under the guise of concern for Palin's "credibility" in the media. </div> <div> Oh really? Gee, I'd thought the media had already lost whatever remaining shred of credibility it had left after <A HREF="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/theanchoress/2008/12/29/workouts-bush-creepy-obama-a-godling/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/theanch"><U>Washington Post </U></A>reporter Eli Zaslow rhapsodized over Obama's glistening pectoral muscles:</div> <bR> <div> "The sun glistened off chiseled pectorals sculpted during four weightlifting sessions each week, and a body toned by regular treadmill runs and basketball games."</div> <bR> <div> In the <A HREF="http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-243-410--13221-0,00.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,71"><U>Runner's World article</U></A>, Palin's tasteful photos include shots of her holding baby Trig, dressed in typical workout gear that admittedly demonstrates just how fit and trim this mother of five truly is. But what's wrong with that? With so many obese US citizens, we should be lauding the Governor of Alaska as a role-model who proves that women can be accomplished, strong, attractive and fit, no matter their age. There's nothing inappropriate about these pictures -- no cleavage, no provocative posing -- just the healthy image of a lifelong athlete with a passion for her preferred sport. A sport, by the way, that millions of Americans enthusiastically embrace. </div> <div> With respect to Letterman's despicable comments, Sarah Palin not only had the right, but the obligation as the mother of a 14 year-old girl to defend her honor. <I>Had Chelsea Clinton been the target of such a vile attack, would anyone have chastised Hillary for jumping to her offspring's defense? </I></div> <div> So what really gives with Sarah Palin's female critics?</div> <div> Good old-fashioned jealousy, nothing more. Despite the popular myths, not all women support each other in sisterly solidarity. And all across the political spectrum there are females who despise Sarah Palin simply because she is the embodiment of beauty and brains. </div> <div> When I was in high school, there were female classmates who absolutely hated me, whether they knew me personally or not. Since my father was a doctor, they immediately dismissed me as a "spoiled rich girl" and in spite of obvious evidence to the contrary, nothing was going to change their minds. Everything I did -- e.g. inviting them over for pool parties, helping with English homework -- was perceived as somehow "showing off" my family's alleged "excessive" wealth, and/or my own intelligence. </div> <div> With some critics, you just can't win, so the best you can do is keep living your life according to your own standards. In Sarah Palin's case, she did go back to tending to the business of Alaska once the election was over, and quite well, I might add, since her state is one of the most <A HREF="http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/04/governor-sarah-palin-is-fiscal.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/"><U>fiscally solvent </U></A>in the country. </div> <div> But back to the jealousy point: sadly, many never grow out of the immaturity of adolescence, thus the palpable female-on-female disdain for a woman who in a sane world, would be lauded as a role-model for her gender. The more things change, the more they stay the same. </div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="a_letter_to_the_rnc_"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>A letter to the RNC.</div> <bR> <div> Friday, June 19, 2009</div> <bR> <div> Republican National Committee</div> <div> 310 First Street, SE</div> <div> P.O. Box 96994,</div> <div> Washington, DC  20077-7556</div> <bR> <div> To:     Whom It May Concern:</div> <bR> <div> RE:     “2009 Obama Agenda Survey”</div> <bR> <div>      Please DO NOT send me any more solicitations poorly disguised as “surveys.” I have already donated $25 for this year, and if you incompetents actually manage to do anything constructive over the next 12 months, I shall, if still solvent, send you another $25 in 2010. You're wasting paper and postage to send me your bogus “surveys.”</div> <div>      If you REALLY want to know what Republican voters are thinking, see if you can find a smarter monkey who can design REAL surveys which are well written to find out what Republicans of ALL types have on their minds. Then, once you have REAL data in your hands, see if you can inform us AND the pseudo-Republicans in Congress about what we want done.</div> <div>      For now, here is a “SURVEY” regarding what I want from my government:</div> <bR> <div> 1.   Fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets, and debt reduction.</div> <div> 2.   A strong military second to none. Maybe Homeland Security should be made a branch of the military; it might be less inept that way.</div> <div> 3.   Less damned government! Less damned federal interference with the states!</div> <div> 4.   Real control of our borders with rapid and complete “exports” of illegals.</div> <div> 5.   Government which conforms strictly with the Constitution. End the “Welfare State” for the U. S. communists; that's not provided for in the Constitution. Make sure Second Amendment freedoms are provided in The Peoples Republic of Washington, DC, as well as in the other northern and left coast “Peoples Republics.” Seat anti-gun congressmen and senators in special, reserved RED seats labeled “Anti-gun Communist.”</div> <div> 6.   Honest, ethical, responsible congressmen and senators - quite likely impossible at this point in our history. Republicans who don't act like Commucrats. Sadly, many “Republicans” (in name only) seem to think they must BUY voters just like the Commucrats have for the last 40-50 years.</div> <bR> <bR> <DIV ALIGN="LEFT"></DIV> <div> Sincerely,</div> <bR> <bR> <div> _________________________</div> <div> Wilson A. Forbes, Jr.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <div>  <A NAME="very_bad_medicine_a_surgeon_s"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A>Very Bad Medicine: a Surgeon's Historical Perspective on Nationalized Healthcare</div> <div> By Daria DiGiovanni    </div> <bR> <div> When my Blog Talk Radio co-host Stephen Rhodes and I sat down to interview Dr. Alphonse J. DiGiovanni, M.D., General and Vascular Surgeon last week (yes, Dr. Al also happens to be my dad) about the Obama Administration's forceful push to nationalize medicine, I already had a fairly accurate understanding of the points the good doctor would make in defense of the free market, and the best healthcare system in the world. </div> <div> Among other troubling things, socialized medicine would jeopardize doctor-patient privilege by giving government bureaucrats the power to interfere with the proper course of treatment (e.g. usurping the doctor's authority to recommend a particular procedure or operation deemed necessary for the patient's health); potentially force mothers-to-be to abort pregnancies determined to have fetal abnormalities (and pay doctors more money to intimidate parents into choosing abortion); and deny elderly patients recommended care simply because the state decides it is not worth the time and money to preserve a life that's nearly over anyway.</div> <div> Dr. Al eloquently opined on all of the above, but he also offered a history lesson as to how it all began, having been in practice since 1965. And just to set the record straight, he is not some wealthy physician born with a silver spoon in his mouth, fighting for a doctor's right to make a lot of cash. Contrary to what liberals want Americans to believe, not every doctor was once a child of privilege. My father was born to Italian immigrant parents who came to the USA well into their 30s, in order to create a better life for their children. His dad was a humble tailor with a third-grade education; his mother a seamstress who only made it as far as the sixth grade. </div> <div> The third of only four surviving sons, Alphonse was a hard-working, gifted student and athlete with a dream of playing professional baseball. When a shoulder injury forever shattered that worthy goal, my father turned to his second love-medicine, maintaining excellent grades throughout high school, college and medical school while simultaneously managing three jobs to finance it all. So when he speaks of the horrors of socialized medicine, it is not because he hates poor people; indeed it is because he knows from experience that when the government encroaches upon any industry, the results are bad for everyone.    </div> <div> <B>Doctor, can you give us a bit of history as to how this all began?    </B></div> <div> “Actually, the first intrusion of government into medicine was the Foran Bill in 1947, which came on the heels of England's development of national healthcare when they regrettably rejected Winston Churchill. In retrospect, I am glad the Foran Bill did not pass; but at the time I was a real liberal. I'd gone to a public high school for gifted students-Central High School in Germantown, Philadelphia where the social sciences division was totally left. All I got was how bad the Republicans were, and how good the Democrats and FDR were. That was when I first heard the term <I>trickle-down</I> <I>economics</I>, long before that criticism was leveled at Ronald Reagan.</div> <div> “In college, I participated in a debating session in which I had to argue in favor of the Foran Bill, but as I immersed myself in study, I began to realize what the cons were. I still thought it was good for the country but my attitudes really changed over time with Barry Goldwater, and Ronald Reagan's impassioned speech on his behalf. That was very telling for me, and it absolutely changed my outlook. </div> <div> “Then along came the first successful government intrusion into medicine in the form of the Medicare Act of 1969, which was President Johnson's aim for his historical legacy. And they managed to pass it by throwing an incredible amount of money at hospitals, who were then allowed to triple and quadruple their fee structures. So not only hospitals, but physicians were very well paid, thus blunting all of the adversarial components, as people who were once opposed to it softened. That is how they were able to pass Medicare.  </div> <div> From 1969 to the present-day, there's been a progressive reduction in fee structures. And from what little is known about Obama's plan, he is not going to throw the money into it that Johnson did-his plan is cradle-to-grave, purely socialistic. And there won't simply be rationing of care for the elderly and disabled, but for everyone.” </div> <div> <B>What about Obama's plan most concerns you? </B></div> <div> “Well, I can't really discuss specifics, because there's not a whole lot of information out there yet. All we know at this point is that it is a general scheme of nationalization. And by the way they are attempting to speed it up and get it out there by August my feeling is that they must already have their objectives in place, since this is a monumental undertaking. In general, I view socialized medicine as a gigantic game of Monopoly in which the government prints out a lot of money and masks the socialistic component in a euphemistic term-a `one-payer' system. I would caution all Americans to be on the lookout for that.”  </div> <div> <B>Are there any medical groups protesting this passage of this potential bill?</B></div> <div> “Although it's been fairly quiet up to this point, I think the response is going to pick up steam and medical organizations will begin to exert their influence on their representatives in D.C. As for the AMA, they've been tilting left for many years and are thus worthless, in my opinion. </div> <div> “I base that on my own experience as a physician in Pennsylvania. Back when malpractice laws were established, the state asked me to give money to capitalize the system, not the insurance itself. It was determined that as a specialist, I owed $2,168, simply to capitalize; that amount was not the insurance premium itself. </div> <div> “Originally, they'd wanted every doctor in PA to contribute $500, but the problem was that general practitioners and pediatricians balked at paying that much. Therefore, they were permitted to give just $250, while specialists like surgeons were required to cough up $2,168 to make up the difference. Again, that figure does not represent the premiums, which were very high.  <B> </B></div> <div> In 1965 when I went into practice, several values of liability coverage were available to suit an individual doctor's needs. But all of that changed, and eventually it became mandatory that you had to purchase at least $1 million in coverage. Now at first, that didn't seem so unreasonable, but by 1995 I'd already paid my annual $40,000 premium when they announced in October of that same year that I owed a supplementary charge of $16,000.  By 1996 I'd had enough and decided to shut down my surgery practice.”<FONT SIZE="4" COLOR="#000000" FACE="Arial" >      </FONT></div> <div> <B>If you look at Great Britain, the doctors ration in the form of quota. And once that quota is satisfied, they are free to go on vacation. Can you elaborate on that? </B></div> <div> “Sure, the British government assigns monetary priorities on healthcare; therefore so much is allocated for certain services. And when that fund is used up, that's it: the doctors have the prerogative to walk away and say `I am not going do this procedure again until next year,' regardless of what is in the best interest of the patient. It's not very good for anyone, the doctors or the patients. </div> <div> “It also varies, what services you may get, depending upon surpluses. In Germany for example, their colonoscopy fund was used up in August. So if you needed a colonoscopy, you had to wait until the New Year to get one. You were basically put back at the end of the line, with no consideration of the urgency of your particular medical situation. </div> <div> “And another thing they do in Great Britain is make patients wait to be seen by a doctor in ambulances in the parking lot, if they are unable to be looked at within four hours. Can you imagine leaving a patient out in the parking lot like that? It's deplorable. The other negative aspect I hate to admit on the part of my profession is that this system also creates lazy doctors. The free market by nature rewards those who work hard and produce quality work, and this is also true in a free-market-based healthcare system: take away incentives and quality suffers. Again, that is ultimately bad for both patients and doctors.”  </div> <div> <B>What about the effects on would-be doctors considering a career in medicine?</B></div> <div> “When you get into these excessive costs, salaries will become stagnant. Over time, the pay scale will be reduced. One of the saddest byproducts of this is that I have many, many colleagues who have discouraged their own children from going into medicine because of the looming disaster, should Obama get his way. Most of the doctors I know are really devoted people who care about doing the very best job they can-not simply based on monetary rewards but because in a free system, they have the motivation do so.”  </div> <div> <B>Do we really have a healthcare crisis?</B></div> <div> “You know, one of my biggest problems with this whole debate is this notion that poor people are denied healthcare. This is simply untrue; no one that presents themselves to an emergency room is ever denied care because of their inability to pay. What it should be rightly termed as is a crisis in health <I>insurance</I>, which is due to many factors, including the overly litigious society we are living in and the negative influence of trial lawyers; the inability of consumers to cross state lines when purchasing the plan that best meets their needs; and of course, the growing number of illegal immigrants that overburden hospitals, especially in border states-an issue our government repeatedly refuses to address. </div> <div> “Further that `47 million uninsured' is a bogus figure I've been hearing about for the last twenty years. It does not include young people who choose not to purchase insurance, people who are in-between jobs and thus transitioning into new plans; and the inflationary impact of Medicare, which has made insurance unaffordable for many. There again, far from being a solution, government interference has only created an even bigger problem.”</div> <div> <B>Doctor, what are some of the moral implications of nationalized healthcare, aside from the rationing of services?</B></div> <div> “Well as you know from Daria, I have a son with Down syndrome who is an absolutely beautiful, beautiful person. At the time of his birth in 1959, we didn't have the diagnostic tests to determine abnormalities like Down's ahead of time, but even if we had, we never would've terminated my wife's pregnancy. Over thirteen years ago, my daughter Carolyn had a scare with her firstborn son when it was determined he was at a high risk of being a Down syndrome baby, but as it turned out, my grandson Christopher was born perfectly healthy. </div> <div> “What I fear the most with a nationalized system is that doctors will be pressured to talk patients into having abortions when such diagnostic tests determine the presence of some sort of abnormality, whether it be Down syndrome or anything else. Further, the government could resort to actually paying doctors more money to perform abortions in these situations. Then at the opposite end of life, there's a high probability that we as a nation could start engaging in euthanasia, based on someone else's subjective idea of `quality of life.' So it is very troubling from a moral perspective. Who among us is God? Who among us is perfect and empowered to decide who lives or dies? That sounds very much like Josef Stalin or Adolf Hitler to me.”     </div> <div> <B>Finally doctor, what can the average person do to fight this trend?</B></div> <div> “I would encourage all Americans to make an effort to get educated, to really understand the dire implications of a nationalized system. Just look at Canada and other places, where even heads of state choose to come to America when they need major surgery. Everyday citizens from Canada regularly cross the border when they're told they have to wait six months just to have a test.</div> <div> “There's a reason why we have the best healthcare system in the world. So get the facts and don't just blindly accept the media spin. Then lobby your representatives in Washington. On the flip side, I believe it is now imperative for all doctors to inform their patients about the realities facing all of us should this horrendous bill pass. They have got to get over their fears of what their patients might think, and start speaking out. All of us have so much to lose if we don't.” </div> <div> *                                                        *                                                         *</div> <bR> <div> Dr. Alphonse J. DiGiovanni, M.D. lives in Newtown Square, PA with his wife, Rose and son, Ralph. He may be reached at <A HREF="mailto:adigiovann@aol.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:adigiovann@aol.com"><U><U>adigiovann@aol.com</U></U></A>. </div> <bR> <div> Daria DiGiovanni is a conservative author, blogger, writer and editor who finds time to co-host several Blog Talk Radio Shows. Her work has appeared at <I>www.smartgirlnation</I>, <I>www.therepublicantemple.com</I>, and in the<I> America Coast to Coast</I> newsletter. Contact her through her website, <A HREF="http://dariaanne.wordpress.com/2009/05/" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://dariaanne.wordpress.com/2009/05/"><U>http://dariaanne.wordpress.com/2009/05/</U></A>.</div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> <bR> <div> <B> <A NAME="submission_guidelines"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="1x1.gif" HEIGHT="1" ALIGN="bottom" WIDTH="1" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0" ></A></B><B>Submission Guidelines</B></div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Contributors will not be compensated.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">I reserve the right to reject any submission for any reason.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Columns must be less than 700 words.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Include your first and last name with your submission. No Internet aliases will be accepted.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Material covering any topic, from any viewpoint, will be considered.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">I reserve the right to edit submissions for length and clarity.</div> <div> <IMG BORDER="0" SRC="Symb075c00b700f000000000.png" HEIGHT="16" WIDTH="24" ALIGN="bottom" HSPACE="0" VSPACE="0">Submit via email to <A HREF="mailto:respond@therightslant.com" TARGET="_top" TITLE="mailto:respond@therightslant.com"><U>respond@therightslant.com</U></A> in MS Word format or paste text in body of message.</div> <div> <A HREF="id194_m.htm" TITLE="Guest Column"><U>Back to Top</U></A></div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>