Texas State Representative Senfronia Thompson doesn't like the resolution endorsed by Governor Perry that would serve notice on the federal government that all powers not ennumerated to the federal government reside with the states. The feds need the reminder -- our government has grown far too big and is subverting the Constitution with all the politically correct handouts and policies coming out of Washington.
Ms. Thompson said she opposed the resolution because it challenged the federal authority to regulate guns and taxes and fund children's health and unemployment insurance. Well, duh! That's the whole point. The Federal government has no such authority. The Second Amendment is our regulation on firearms, and it says we can have 'em. And in 1776, we declared our independence over taxation without representation. We're essentially in the same position now. Our Congress members are by and large corrupt, and their main concern is redistributing wealth, not funding legitimate government. And I guarantee you won't find any mention of health or unemployment insurance in the Constitution!
Senfronia Thompson and her ilk are the very reason we needed this resolution!
"Technicality shoots down states' rights bill." The Dallas Morning News; May 20, 2009; p. 6A.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
It's a crisis if you do, it's a crisis if you don't.
I have become amused by the media creation of crises. Have you noticed that whichever way it goes, we're doomed?
For example, how long have the environmentalists been warning us about filling up our landfills? We'll have no earth left, they say, if we don't quit generating so much garbage. It's a crisis! But in recent months, the economy has been bad (another crisis), so people evidently have not been consuming as much. Landfills across the nation are laying off workers, cutting hours, and hiking fees. It's a crisis!
Same thing with the oil industry. Oil prices hit record highs a few months ago. It's a crisis! People will starve! But when they started coming down, guess what? The oil companies are hurting. Another crisis!
I say we all just take a deep breath and quit making everything into a crisis! We'll all be happier and worry less. But then again, will that create a crisis for the psychiatrists?
"Less trash, less cash for city." The Dallas Morning News; May 20, 2009; p. 1B.
For example, how long have the environmentalists been warning us about filling up our landfills? We'll have no earth left, they say, if we don't quit generating so much garbage. It's a crisis! But in recent months, the economy has been bad (another crisis), so people evidently have not been consuming as much. Landfills across the nation are laying off workers, cutting hours, and hiking fees. It's a crisis!
Same thing with the oil industry. Oil prices hit record highs a few months ago. It's a crisis! People will starve! But when they started coming down, guess what? The oil companies are hurting. Another crisis!
I say we all just take a deep breath and quit making everything into a crisis! We'll all be happier and worry less. But then again, will that create a crisis for the psychiatrists?
"Less trash, less cash for city." The Dallas Morning News; May 20, 2009; p. 1B.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Second Essie
It's time for an Essie Award -- the award given on the basis of pure stupidity. Today's Essie goes to Zhang Jiao of Anhui Province in China. Zhang and his 5-year-old son were visiting the zoo in Beijing. The little boy dropped his toy into the panda enclosure. Zhang jumped into the enclosure to retrieve the toy. Gu Gu, a 240 pound panda, didn't like the intrusion into his space. He mauled the man's legs and refused to let go until zookeepers pried his jaws open with tools.
Congratulations, Zhang Jiao!
"Panda mauls man who jumped into area." The Dallas Morning News; January 9, 2009; p. 13A.
Congratulations, Zhang Jiao!
"Panda mauls man who jumped into area." The Dallas Morning News; January 9, 2009; p. 13A.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
I don't like being squeezed!
Obama says agreement on an energy bill and a promise by interest groups to squeeze trillions of dollars in savings from the health care system show that change has come to Washington. Oh, Boy! You want to know who's getting squeezed?
It's the man who wants to buy a new car that's going to cost him $1,300 more because of the energy bill mandates. It's the homeowner who will pay approximately $1,200 more a year in electricity bills because of the energy bill mandates. It's the employer who will have to pay for national health insurance for his employees. It's the worker who has health insurance from his employer that he will now have to pay tax on. It's the insurance policy owner who will have to pay tax on the benefits he receives from his plan. And on and on and on. VOTE REPUBLICAN and tell Obama to keep the change!
"Obama touts energy, health bills." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 9A.
It's the man who wants to buy a new car that's going to cost him $1,300 more because of the energy bill mandates. It's the homeowner who will pay approximately $1,200 more a year in electricity bills because of the energy bill mandates. It's the employer who will have to pay for national health insurance for his employees. It's the worker who has health insurance from his employer that he will now have to pay tax on. It's the insurance policy owner who will have to pay tax on the benefits he receives from his plan. And on and on and on. VOTE REPUBLICAN and tell Obama to keep the change!
"Obama touts energy, health bills." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 9A.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Who would have thought?
Did you know that sexual responsibility through abstinence and monogamy is irresponsible and dangerous? That's what France, Germany, the United Nations' AIDS-fighting agency, and the British medical journal The Lancet said about Pope Benedict's statement that condoms weren't the answer to Africa's AIDS epidemic, but that a moral lifestyle as described above was.
We are truly living in the days when good is called evil and evil is called good.
"Vatican says critics trying to silence pope." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 15A.
We are truly living in the days when good is called evil and evil is called good.
"Vatican says critics trying to silence pope." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 15A.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
It's all about the money.
Our history books and educational system push Martin Luther King, Jr. as the great messiah. Too bad his family didn't take after him. They've charged the Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial Project Foundation $800,000 to use his image and words in the National Mall memorial they plan for him. I really don't care what a private foundation chooses to do with its money. The sentence that caught my attention in this report was this one: "The memorial . . . is being paid for almost entirely with private money. . ."
What does "almost entirely" mean? Personally, I find it offensive that any of my tax money is going toward a memorial to a known adulterer and plagiarist. I find it even more offensive that his greedy kids have their hands in the till.
"King family charges foundation $800K." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 7A.
What does "almost entirely" mean? Personally, I find it offensive that any of my tax money is going toward a memorial to a known adulterer and plagiarist. I find it even more offensive that his greedy kids have their hands in the till.
"King family charges foundation $800K." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 7A.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
I missed it!
I missed the secession announcement! According to a State Department list, countries Secretary of State Clinton has visited include France, Germany, Japan, China, and Texas. Does this mean I don't have to send the IRS a check anymore?
"Texas: To U.S., a foreign concept." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 6A.
"Texas: To U.S., a foreign concept." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 6A.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Is that the best he can do?
I've commented before on Obama's bent toward picking people who are dishonest. Geithner and several others in his administration have been quite lax on paying their taxes -- something you would think would be very important to a "public servant." His auto czar, Steven Rattner, has problems, too. His firm has been linked to federal and state investigations of millions of dollars in pension fund kickbacks.
Are these people the best Obama can do? If they are, does that mean there are no honest people anymore? I think the answer to both those questions is a resounding no. But when the man in charge has no character, he'll pick the same kind of personality to work for him. As my mama used to say, "Birds of a feather flock together."
"Obama sticking by auto czar despite investigation." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 3D.
Are these people the best Obama can do? If they are, does that mean there are no honest people anymore? I think the answer to both those questions is a resounding no. But when the man in charge has no character, he'll pick the same kind of personality to work for him. As my mama used to say, "Birds of a feather flock together."
"Obama sticking by auto czar despite investigation." The Dallas Morning News; April 18, 2009; p. 3D.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Meet your Aunt Ida.
Do you want to know why evolution is a theory and not an established fact as many scientists would have you believe? Here are some excerpts from an article about a fossil that was found in Germany. Scientists claim she could be our evolutionary great-great-great-aunt -- a proverbial missing link. Notice that not one thing in here is proven, yet they take it as established. Watch the italicized words -- I think they are very telling.
". . .offered clues about what some of our earliest ancestors might have looked like."
"So far, paleontologists have had to make educated guesses about early primate evolution, because they have been forced to work with fragments of partial skeletons, mainly teeth and jaws."
"They conclude that Ida was . . ."
". . .surmises that the creature could have lived . ."
If I found teeth and jawbones, I wouldn't say I found a skeleton. I wouldn't even say I found a partial skeleton. I'd say I found some teeth and jawbones. Yet that's what evolution is built on. They find one tiny piece of something, then they build a whole imaginary creature around it. And they say, "This could have been . . . this might have been . . . we conclude . . ." and pretty soon the whole scientific world has swallowed the tale.
I predict that this episode may turn out to be like Piltdown man. If you're not familiar with that funny story, in 1912 a jawbone and a skull were found in the village of Piltdown in England. It was the missing link! It was a very early form of man! For more than 40 years, scientists accepted this as fact. Then, in 1953, it was discovered that the jawbone came from an orangutan and had been incorporated into a modern human skull. The educated scientists had been had!
Aunt Ida sounds equally as fishy -- an "unnamed private collector" dug the skeleton up in 1983. The skeleton was split into two pieces and one of the pieces sold to a private museum in Wyoming. The piece kept by the collector was displayed at a fossil fair in Hamburg, Germany, in 2006, and purchased by an Oslo Museum for something in the neighborhood of a million dollars. I think the "unnamed private collector" is one smart cookie, and may be as good a hoaxer as the Piltdown discoverer!
The research on the skeleton has been done "in secret." The researchers have "rapidly written" a book called The Link. A TV documentary will be shown in the U.S. later this year. Asked why this study has not appeared in the most prestigious scientific journals, Philip Gingerich of the Ida research team said, "There was a TV company involved and time pressure. We've been pushed to finish the study. It's not how I like to do science." Hmmmmm - doesn't sound like science at all, to me. Sounds like media hype and a great big hoax -- something like the evolutionary theory as a whole.
"Celebrated Fossil Shown to World." The Wall Street Journal; May 20, 2009; p. A3.
". . .offered clues about what some of our earliest ancestors might have looked like."
"So far, paleontologists have had to make educated guesses about early primate evolution, because they have been forced to work with fragments of partial skeletons, mainly teeth and jaws."
"They conclude that Ida was . . ."
". . .surmises that the creature could have lived . ."
If I found teeth and jawbones, I wouldn't say I found a skeleton. I wouldn't even say I found a partial skeleton. I'd say I found some teeth and jawbones. Yet that's what evolution is built on. They find one tiny piece of something, then they build a whole imaginary creature around it. And they say, "This could have been . . . this might have been . . . we conclude . . ." and pretty soon the whole scientific world has swallowed the tale.
I predict that this episode may turn out to be like Piltdown man. If you're not familiar with that funny story, in 1912 a jawbone and a skull were found in the village of Piltdown in England. It was the missing link! It was a very early form of man! For more than 40 years, scientists accepted this as fact. Then, in 1953, it was discovered that the jawbone came from an orangutan and had been incorporated into a modern human skull. The educated scientists had been had!
Aunt Ida sounds equally as fishy -- an "unnamed private collector" dug the skeleton up in 1983. The skeleton was split into two pieces and one of the pieces sold to a private museum in Wyoming. The piece kept by the collector was displayed at a fossil fair in Hamburg, Germany, in 2006, and purchased by an Oslo Museum for something in the neighborhood of a million dollars. I think the "unnamed private collector" is one smart cookie, and may be as good a hoaxer as the Piltdown discoverer!
The research on the skeleton has been done "in secret." The researchers have "rapidly written" a book called The Link. A TV documentary will be shown in the U.S. later this year. Asked why this study has not appeared in the most prestigious scientific journals, Philip Gingerich of the Ida research team said, "There was a TV company involved and time pressure. We've been pushed to finish the study. It's not how I like to do science." Hmmmmm - doesn't sound like science at all, to me. Sounds like media hype and a great big hoax -- something like the evolutionary theory as a whole.
"Celebrated Fossil Shown to World." The Wall Street Journal; May 20, 2009; p. A3.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Ah - the good old days!
I loved President Bush (the younger), but I disagreed with his stance on illegal immigrants. The only logical thing to do with illegals is round them up and send them home. The President was more inclined to be lenient and let them jump the line to gain legal status.
But then I came across this tidbit. Immigration prosecutions in the federal courts more than quadrupled during the eight years of the Bush administration, and Texas' led the nation in the surge with 25,061 prosecutions in the Southern district. Granted, I don't know what happened with these prosecutions and where these illegals are now, but that was at least a start. I fear the prosecution numbers have dropped since January 20 and will continue to do so.
"Immigration prosecutions surge under Bush's watch." The Dallas Morning News; January 13, 2009; p. 1A.
But then I came across this tidbit. Immigration prosecutions in the federal courts more than quadrupled during the eight years of the Bush administration, and Texas' led the nation in the surge with 25,061 prosecutions in the Southern district. Granted, I don't know what happened with these prosecutions and where these illegals are now, but that was at least a start. I fear the prosecution numbers have dropped since January 20 and will continue to do so.
"Immigration prosecutions surge under Bush's watch." The Dallas Morning News; January 13, 2009; p. 1A.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
What Einstein thought this up?
January 9, 2009, was a special day in New Orleans. A group called SilenceIsViolence asked New Orleans residents to stay home and wear red to call attention to the city's escalating number of murders. If everybody stayed home, how did anybody know whether or not you were wearing red? And when somebody missed you somewhere, did they automatically say, "Oh, he's not here because there are so many murders"? And I wonder how many murderers said, "You know, Joe Pacifist stayed home today and wore red. Maybe I'll rethink this killing thing"? Guess I'm just a little unclear on the concept.
"Group protesting murders." The Dallas Morning News; January 9, 2009; p. 3A.
"Group protesting murders." The Dallas Morning News; January 9, 2009; p. 3A.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Don't let them kid you.
You know how restaurant patrons are shamed into tipping by being told that the waiters do not receive even minimum wage? That they depend on tips for their income?
Well, that's only partly true. As Paul Harvey used to say, here's the rest of the story. Restaurants are allowed to pay less than minimum wage. HOWEVER, if the employee's tips do not come up to the minimum wage, the employer must boost the employee's pay to the minimum wage level. In fact, according to Mark Glasper, the Ohio Restaurant Association's communications director, most servers are paid more than minimum wage to begin with.
So go ahead and tip -- Mr. Essie and I always do. But don't think that poor server is being overworked and underpaid. It ain't necessarily so!
"Where does your gratuity go?" The Dallas Morning News; April 11, 2009; p. 15A.
Well, that's only partly true. As Paul Harvey used to say, here's the rest of the story. Restaurants are allowed to pay less than minimum wage. HOWEVER, if the employee's tips do not come up to the minimum wage, the employer must boost the employee's pay to the minimum wage level. In fact, according to Mark Glasper, the Ohio Restaurant Association's communications director, most servers are paid more than minimum wage to begin with.
So go ahead and tip -- Mr. Essie and I always do. But don't think that poor server is being overworked and underpaid. It ain't necessarily so!
"Where does your gratuity go?" The Dallas Morning News; April 11, 2009; p. 15A.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
No, let's not.
The headline reads, "Pastor: Let's honor Obama." Southern Baptist pastor Dwight McKissic has proposed a resolution for the convention later this month. It would "celebrate the election of the first black U.S. president as a significant contribution to the ongoing cause of racial reconciliation."
Well, excuse me, but voting for a presidential candidate to appease one race or another is stupid! Honoring someone because of his skin color is stupid. So far, Obama has done nothing worthy of honor. On the contrary, he's placing our country in mortal danger. Essie May says in response to the headline, "No, let's not."
"Pastor: Let's honor Obama." The Dallas Morning News; June 6, 2009; p. 5B.
Well, excuse me, but voting for a presidential candidate to appease one race or another is stupid! Honoring someone because of his skin color is stupid. So far, Obama has done nothing worthy of honor. On the contrary, he's placing our country in mortal danger. Essie May says in response to the headline, "No, let's not."
"Pastor: Let's honor Obama." The Dallas Morning News; June 6, 2009; p. 5B.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Do they really think they can help these people?
Probably everybody needs a helping hand every now and then. But there are some people you cannot help. The City of Sacramento, California, recently put into action a plan to clear out a tent city of homeless people. The goal is to move some of them to shelters and some of them to transitional housing. I promise you, within six weeks, these people will be on the streets again, because the "majority of residents at Tent City are chronic homeless who have lived there for years."
If they could be helped, don't you think they'd have homes by now? Most of these people have drug or alcohol problems or just plain old misplaced priorities. For example, one of the tent city people is shown preparing a meal. She has elaborate tattoos on her arms. Number one, those tattoos probably cost quite a bit. If I were homeless, a tattoo is the last thing I'd be thinking of. Number two, if I were an employer, I seriously doubt I would hire her. I don't care how many people have them, tattoos are tacky, and they project a cheap image. If you want a good job, don't mark up your body!
"'Tent City' residents may move." The Dallas Morning News; March 21, 2009; p. 8A.
If they could be helped, don't you think they'd have homes by now? Most of these people have drug or alcohol problems or just plain old misplaced priorities. For example, one of the tent city people is shown preparing a meal. She has elaborate tattoos on her arms. Number one, those tattoos probably cost quite a bit. If I were homeless, a tattoo is the last thing I'd be thinking of. Number two, if I were an employer, I seriously doubt I would hire her. I don't care how many people have them, tattoos are tacky, and they project a cheap image. If you want a good job, don't mark up your body!
"'Tent City' residents may move." The Dallas Morning News; March 21, 2009; p. 8A.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
How to Really Reduce Health Care Costs.
Hey, Congress -- want to really reduce health care costs? How about outlawing cigarettes? A CDC study showed that a smoking ban in Pueblo, Colorado, coincided with a 41% drop in heart attack hospitalizations in the three years after the workplace smoking ban took place. There was no such drop in two neighboring areas.
Dr. Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society said, "This is now the ninth study, so it is clear that smoke-free laws are one of the most effective and cost-effective ways to reduce heart attacks." Not only smokers are affected by the poisons released by cigarettes, but non-smokers who inhale the second-hand smoke are also affected. Second-hand smoke damages the lining of blood vessels and increases the kind of blood clotting that leads to heart attacks.
So if this health care thing is not just a power grab, and banning cigarettes will save all these lives and all this money, let's get rid of the stinky things!
"CDC: Smoking ban reduced heart attacks." The Dallas Morning News; January 1, 2009; p. 8A.
Dr. Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society said, "This is now the ninth study, so it is clear that smoke-free laws are one of the most effective and cost-effective ways to reduce heart attacks." Not only smokers are affected by the poisons released by cigarettes, but non-smokers who inhale the second-hand smoke are also affected. Second-hand smoke damages the lining of blood vessels and increases the kind of blood clotting that leads to heart attacks.
So if this health care thing is not just a power grab, and banning cigarettes will save all these lives and all this money, let's get rid of the stinky things!
"CDC: Smoking ban reduced heart attacks." The Dallas Morning News; January 1, 2009; p. 8A.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Casting Stones
Have you heard of Maury Davis? He's the pastor of a megachurch. According to his church auditor, he earns "an ample salary on a par with his peers," has a lovely home with a pool and volleyball court, and enjoys vacations in Florida and New Mexico. Oh -- one other thing -- in 1975, he slit the throat of Jo Ella Liles in Irving, Texas. He served only eight years in prison for his horrendous crime. Then, he began to make a living telling the story of what he'd done.
No one officially informed the Liles family that Davis had been released from prison. They heard it from a friend, then Jo Ella's son saw Davis's picture on a billboard for the church. Ron Liles said, "I'm seeing somebody who had great success at my expense, at my mother's expense. How can you not feel a little hostile?" Davis is prone to theatrics in his church -- fireworks go off indoors on the Fourth of July, and he once released live chickens to make a point. He says he doesn't believe in the death penalty. Referring to Jesus when the crowd wanted to stone the adulterous woman, he says, "I don't believe we have the right to throw the stone."
I'm tired of seeing that passage pulled out of context. Jesus did not deny the woman deserved punishment. The point he was making was that the hypocritical crowd who condemned her weren't really concerned about the sin and the law. If they had been, they would have taken her to the proper legal and/or religious authority, not Jesus. He had no earthly religious or legal authority to pass judgment. If they had been sincere, the man involved would have been in the midst of them, too. What they had in mind was tripping Jesus up. They should have known better!
If we abolish the death penalty on the basis that everyone has unclean hands, then we must abolish all penalties -- no more prison, no more fines, no more community service. After all, the Bible says, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Even Davis admits that some criminals, including himself, deserve to die. But, he says, "I don't believe we have the right to throw the stone." Irving Detective John Looper remembers the brutality of what Davis did. He says Davis is "either making a real good living and he's conned a lot of people -- or he is truly converted. And, it's not up to me to judge him." I beg to differ:
"Pastor reborn, but his past still haunts." The Dallas Morning News; April 19, 2009; p. 1A.
No one officially informed the Liles family that Davis had been released from prison. They heard it from a friend, then Jo Ella's son saw Davis's picture on a billboard for the church. Ron Liles said, "I'm seeing somebody who had great success at my expense, at my mother's expense. How can you not feel a little hostile?" Davis is prone to theatrics in his church -- fireworks go off indoors on the Fourth of July, and he once released live chickens to make a point. He says he doesn't believe in the death penalty. Referring to Jesus when the crowd wanted to stone the adulterous woman, he says, "I don't believe we have the right to throw the stone."
I'm tired of seeing that passage pulled out of context. Jesus did not deny the woman deserved punishment. The point he was making was that the hypocritical crowd who condemned her weren't really concerned about the sin and the law. If they had been, they would have taken her to the proper legal and/or religious authority, not Jesus. He had no earthly religious or legal authority to pass judgment. If they had been sincere, the man involved would have been in the midst of them, too. What they had in mind was tripping Jesus up. They should have known better!
If we abolish the death penalty on the basis that everyone has unclean hands, then we must abolish all penalties -- no more prison, no more fines, no more community service. After all, the Bible says, "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Even Davis admits that some criminals, including himself, deserve to die. But, he says, "I don't believe we have the right to throw the stone." Irving Detective John Looper remembers the brutality of what Davis did. He says Davis is "either making a real good living and he's conned a lot of people -- or he is truly converted. And, it's not up to me to judge him." I beg to differ:
- I John 4:1: Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
- 2 Corinthians 11:13-15: For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
"Pastor reborn, but his past still haunts." The Dallas Morning News; April 19, 2009; p. 1A.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Liberals have no sense of humor.
Have you seen the cartoon that has all the hispanics bent out of shape? I think it's hilarious. It bears the caption: "Fiesta time at the confirmation hearing." It shows a couple of elephants (Republican senators) with bats in their hands (in this case, elephants have hands). Hanging from a string is the pinata -- Judge Sotomayor. Obama, wearing a sombrero, says, "Now, who wants to be first?"
Jean Warner, chair of the Oklahoma Women's Coalition, said, "Here's a woman wearing a judge's robes and she's about to get the crap beaten out of her because she has the audacity to think she can sit on the Supreme Court. But most young girls who look at the cartoon don't even understand that. They just see guys with sticks about to hit a woman."
Get a grip, Jean! It's a political cartoon! It has nothing to do with abusing women. If anything, it's a swipe at the Republicans who are expected to ask some hardline questions in the confirmation.
Rossana Rosado, publisher and chief executive officer of El Diario La Prensa said, "On first view, you just see her hanging by a rope and that's a very disturbing image."
Come on Rossana, you're in charge of a Latino publication and you don't recognize a pinata when you see one? What's wrong with this picture?
I highly suspect had the nominee been a conservative woman, and this type cartoon had been published, not a word of complaint would have been heard.
"Sotomayor cartoon draws ire of Latinos." The Dallas Morning News; June 6, 2009; p. 6A.
http://www.spislandbreeze.com/articles/cartoon-5869-bok-sotomayor.html (If you've not seen the cartoon, click on this link).
Jean Warner, chair of the Oklahoma Women's Coalition, said, "Here's a woman wearing a judge's robes and she's about to get the crap beaten out of her because she has the audacity to think she can sit on the Supreme Court. But most young girls who look at the cartoon don't even understand that. They just see guys with sticks about to hit a woman."
Get a grip, Jean! It's a political cartoon! It has nothing to do with abusing women. If anything, it's a swipe at the Republicans who are expected to ask some hardline questions in the confirmation.
Rossana Rosado, publisher and chief executive officer of El Diario La Prensa said, "On first view, you just see her hanging by a rope and that's a very disturbing image."
Come on Rossana, you're in charge of a Latino publication and you don't recognize a pinata when you see one? What's wrong with this picture?
I highly suspect had the nominee been a conservative woman, and this type cartoon had been published, not a word of complaint would have been heard.
"Sotomayor cartoon draws ire of Latinos." The Dallas Morning News; June 6, 2009; p. 6A.
http://www.spislandbreeze.com/articles/cartoon-5869-bok-sotomayor.html (If you've not seen the cartoon, click on this link).
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Wish I'd written this . . .
Lou Pritchett is a retired Procter and Gamble executive. He wrote this letter to Obama and submitted it to The New York Times for publication. Surprisingly (not), to date, the newspaper has not printed the letter.
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you [actually, I know more than I want to -- enough to know that he's a very dangerous man].
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector [and we all know how efficient government programs are].
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one [I heard an anecdote yesterday about one of the European countries on national health care -- if an ambulance is called for an emergency, the first question is "how old is the victim." If the answer is 65 or over, the ambulance is not dispatched. I have no idea whether or not this is true, but Obama can't do what he says he will without rationing of some sort.]
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations [by this time, it's progressed considerably beyond "begun" -- this week, Obama appointed his "compensation czar."]
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient [see yesterday's post].
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do [notice: this letter was not printed].
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett
Lou Pritchett has hit the nail on the head -- we should all be afraid.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/lou_pritchett_letter.htm
AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA
Dear President Obama:
You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you [actually, I know more than I want to -- enough to know that he's a very dangerous man].
You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.
You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.
You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.
You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame America' crowd and deliver this message abroad.
You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector [and we all know how efficient government programs are].
You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one [I heard an anecdote yesterday about one of the European countries on national health care -- if an ambulance is called for an emergency, the first question is "how old is the victim." If the answer is 65 or over, the ambulance is not dispatched. I have no idea whether or not this is true, but Obama can't do what he says he will without rationing of some sort.]
You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations [by this time, it's progressed considerably beyond "begun" -- this week, Obama appointed his "compensation czar."]
You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.
You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient [see yesterday's post].
You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do [notice: this letter was not printed].
You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
Lou Pritchett
Lou Pritchett has hit the nail on the head -- we should all be afraid.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/lou_pritchett_letter.htm
Friday, June 12, 2009
Obama the Divine
I still don't think Obama is the anti-christ, but I sure think he's paving the way. Have you heard what the editor of Newsweek said in a Chris Matthews interview?
CHRIS MATTHEWS (HOST):Evan Thomas is editor at large for Newsweek magazine. Evan, you remember 1984. It wasn't 100 years ago. Reagan and World War II and the sense of us as the good guys in the world, how are we doing?
EVAN THOMAS: Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn't felt that way in recent years. So Obama's had, really, a different task We're seen too often as the bad guys. And he, he has a very different job from ... Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is - we are above that now. We're not just parochial, we're not just chauvinistic, we're not just provincial. We stand for something, I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above above the world, he's sort of God.
Scary isn't it, that people can be so besotted by one man who is so obviously out of his league. Just for the record, the President of the United States SHOULD be all about America! He SHOULD be the number one American patriot! Alas, "we are above that now."
(There's a video of this portion of the interview in the link below.)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/06/05/newsweek_editor_evan_thomas_obama_is_sort_of_god.html
CHRIS MATTHEWS (HOST):Evan Thomas is editor at large for Newsweek magazine. Evan, you remember 1984. It wasn't 100 years ago. Reagan and World War II and the sense of us as the good guys in the world, how are we doing?
EVAN THOMAS: Well, we were the good guys in 1984, it felt that way. It hasn't felt that way in recent years. So Obama's had, really, a different task We're seen too often as the bad guys. And he, he has a very different job from ... Reagan was all about America, and you talked about it. Obama is - we are above that now. We're not just parochial, we're not just chauvinistic, we're not just provincial. We stand for something, I mean in a way Obama's standing above the country, above above the world, he's sort of God.
Scary isn't it, that people can be so besotted by one man who is so obviously out of his league. Just for the record, the President of the United States SHOULD be all about America! He SHOULD be the number one American patriot! Alas, "we are above that now."
(There's a video of this portion of the interview in the link below.)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/06/05/newsweek_editor_evan_thomas_obama_is_sort_of_god.html
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Are colleges and universities biased?
I'm sure you've all heard about the brouhaha over Obama speaking at Notre Dame University's commencement. Father John Jenkins, Notre Dame President, said that inviting Obama to speak was not a political statement or endorsement of policy. But he didn't stop there. He said he admired the President's views on "expanding health care, alleviating poverty, and building peace through diplomacy." Sounds pretty political to me. Sounds pretty left-leaning political to me.
But that's not a surprise. The Center for the Study of Popular Culture conducted a study covering ten years. They categorized commencement speakers for the nation's top schools as either liberal, conservative, republican, democrat, or non-partisan. The numbers added up to 226 liberal speakers and 15 conservative ones.
Yet faculty from those schools will tell you they are very open-minded -- it's all us conservatives who have closed, narrow minds. American Enterprise magazine did a survey on how lop-sided faculty representation is: "In eight academic departments surveyed at Cornell University, 166 professors were registered in the Democratic Party or another party of the left, with just six registered with Republicans or another party of the right. . .Similar imbalance showed up in departments at the 19 other universities surveyed. At the University of Colorado-Boulder, the numbers were 116 to 5. It was 151-17 at Stanford, 54-3 at Brown, 99-6 at the University of California-San Diego, and 59-7 at Berkeley, the flagship of the University of California system . . . At Williams College, a poll turned up only four registered Republicans among the more than 200 professors on campus."
But do the lefties promote their idealogies in the classroom? You bet they do! University of Southern California San Diego Provost David Jordan said, "Why should I teach a point of view I don't agree with? I should teach what is useful to the student. I don't know that I have the responsibility to teach somebody's view that is benighted or irrelevant." He not only promotes his view, he dismisses anyone with an opposing view as "benighted and irrelevant." Sounds very open-minded to me!
Star Parker, conservative commentator and author, was invited by Students for Human Life to speak at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota. University staff rejected the request for her to speak on campus. But they approved invitations to nut-case liberal Al Franken and transgender activist Debra Davis. Very open-minded, wouldn't you say? And this is a Catholic school!
Again, I say, we're in deep doo-doo!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34388
"Notre Dame dishes up moral ambiguity." The Dallas Morning News; May 19, 2009; p. 15A.
But that's not a surprise. The Center for the Study of Popular Culture conducted a study covering ten years. They categorized commencement speakers for the nation's top schools as either liberal, conservative, republican, democrat, or non-partisan. The numbers added up to 226 liberal speakers and 15 conservative ones.
Yet faculty from those schools will tell you they are very open-minded -- it's all us conservatives who have closed, narrow minds. American Enterprise magazine did a survey on how lop-sided faculty representation is: "In eight academic departments surveyed at Cornell University, 166 professors were registered in the Democratic Party or another party of the left, with just six registered with Republicans or another party of the right. . .Similar imbalance showed up in departments at the 19 other universities surveyed. At the University of Colorado-Boulder, the numbers were 116 to 5. It was 151-17 at Stanford, 54-3 at Brown, 99-6 at the University of California-San Diego, and 59-7 at Berkeley, the flagship of the University of California system . . . At Williams College, a poll turned up only four registered Republicans among the more than 200 professors on campus."
But do the lefties promote their idealogies in the classroom? You bet they do! University of Southern California San Diego Provost David Jordan said, "Why should I teach a point of view I don't agree with? I should teach what is useful to the student. I don't know that I have the responsibility to teach somebody's view that is benighted or irrelevant." He not only promotes his view, he dismisses anyone with an opposing view as "benighted and irrelevant." Sounds very open-minded to me!
Star Parker, conservative commentator and author, was invited by Students for Human Life to speak at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota. University staff rejected the request for her to speak on campus. But they approved invitations to nut-case liberal Al Franken and transgender activist Debra Davis. Very open-minded, wouldn't you say? And this is a Catholic school!
Again, I say, we're in deep doo-doo!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34388
"Notre Dame dishes up moral ambiguity." The Dallas Morning News; May 19, 2009; p. 15A.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Who, What, When, Where, Why
Many years ago, I took some basic journalism classes. We were taught that every article should include the five W's -- who, what, when, where, why.
Our local newspaper really needs some lessons in the first W. There was a big front-page feature Monday about a local girl who made good -- Lorie Satcher. She has written some songs for some pretty big names -- among them George Strait. I marked it for an Essie May post because all through the article, George's last name was spelled "Straight." This is a pretty famous man, and it would have been an easy thing to check for the correct spelling of his name. I did it in about 30 seconds.
In Tuesday's paper, there was a correction. It seems Lorie Satcher is not really Lorie Satcher -- she's Leslie Satcher. How can you interview a person and do an entire front page feature and not know what her name is? DUH!
"A long, hard road." The Paris News; June 8, 2009; p. 1.
Our local newspaper really needs some lessons in the first W. There was a big front-page feature Monday about a local girl who made good -- Lorie Satcher. She has written some songs for some pretty big names -- among them George Strait. I marked it for an Essie May post because all through the article, George's last name was spelled "Straight." This is a pretty famous man, and it would have been an easy thing to check for the correct spelling of his name. I did it in about 30 seconds.
In Tuesday's paper, there was a correction. It seems Lorie Satcher is not really Lorie Satcher -- she's Leslie Satcher. How can you interview a person and do an entire front page feature and not know what her name is? DUH!
"A long, hard road." The Paris News; June 8, 2009; p. 1.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
I now pronounce you . . .
The news media are so politically correct it's nauseating. In May, the newspaper reported that comedian Wanda Sykes and her wife are the parents of twins. "The twins are the first children for the couple, who married last October," the paper gushes. There's no mention of how two women got babies.
So what does the officiant at the wedding ceremony say? "I now pronounce you husband and wife"? "Wife and wife"? "Pervert and pervert"?
The really sad part of all this is those poor, innocent children.
"Sykes, wife welcome 2 bundles of joy." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 4E.
So what does the officiant at the wedding ceremony say? "I now pronounce you husband and wife"? "Wife and wife"? "Pervert and pervert"?
The really sad part of all this is those poor, innocent children.
"Sykes, wife welcome 2 bundles of joy." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 4E.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Is having HIV a crime?
Regan Hofmann thinks the Canadian justice system is unfair. Last month in Toronto, Johnson Aziga was convicted on two counts of first-degree murder and 10 counts of aggravated assault for transmitting HIV to two female partners who later died from it. He knew he was HIV positive when he had sex with the women, but he didn't tell them. We shouldn't criminalize those with HIV and add to their stigma she says. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this man was not convicted of having HIV. He was convicted of recklessly killing two people.
Then she cites a case from Dallas. An HIV-positive man was sentenced to 35 years for harassing a public servant with a deadly weapon when he spit on a police officer. There has never been a recorded case of HIV transmission via saliva, she says. I don't know about you, but I'm not letting anyone with HIV spit on me. Let's give her the benefit of the doubt and say HIV can't be transmitted through saliva. We know it can be transmitted through blood; so what if the guy's gums were bleeding and there was some blood mixed in with that saliva? It's a deadly weapon then! Again, this man was not convicted of having HIV. He was convicted of assaulting a police officer.
She says making HIV-positive people criminals (a false premise as discussed above) will keep them from getting tested and discussing their status with sex partners. She says that's because if they don't know they have HIV, they're not culpable. What convoluted reasoning!
By the way, Regan is HIV-positive. Do you think she's so upset about this because she's planning to pass it on?
"The unhealthy criminalization of HIV." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 4P.
Then she cites a case from Dallas. An HIV-positive man was sentenced to 35 years for harassing a public servant with a deadly weapon when he spit on a police officer. There has never been a recorded case of HIV transmission via saliva, she says. I don't know about you, but I'm not letting anyone with HIV spit on me. Let's give her the benefit of the doubt and say HIV can't be transmitted through saliva. We know it can be transmitted through blood; so what if the guy's gums were bleeding and there was some blood mixed in with that saliva? It's a deadly weapon then! Again, this man was not convicted of having HIV. He was convicted of assaulting a police officer.
She says making HIV-positive people criminals (a false premise as discussed above) will keep them from getting tested and discussing their status with sex partners. She says that's because if they don't know they have HIV, they're not culpable. What convoluted reasoning!
By the way, Regan is HIV-positive. Do you think she's so upset about this because she's planning to pass it on?
"The unhealthy criminalization of HIV." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 4P.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Do the French have it better?
Those who are promoting Obama's universal health care point to the French. Everyone in France has health care, but do they really have it better than we do?
In the U.S., the personal tax rate tops out at around 36%. In France, it's 50%. In France, employers contribute 12.8% of employee compensation for national health insurance. Add that to the 7.65% employers are already paying for social security/medicare, and you will probably price some people out of their jobs.
In France, chronic deficits have forced the government to add large amounts of tax revenue to health insurance financing, including a 5.25% income tax surcharge -- they pay tax on their tax. The situation is so unsustainable, according to the head of the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Institute of Political Studies in Paris, that the French government will either have to raise employee contributions or limit national health insurance to the 10 million people with chronic illnesses.
In France, Elizabeth Dutertre needed surgery to correct double vision. She was lucky the first time -- she was able to have the surgery two months after the diagnosis. When she needed a second surgery, however, she was told it would be two years. She opted to take care of it herself and had the surgery in three weeks. In the U.S. however, though Obama denies it, we are headed for mandatory government health care. No one will have the option to go private.
Doctors in France are opting out of the national health care and giving up government pensions in the process because the government-set fees aren't enough to cover their expenses. Will the same happen in the U.S.? I know of several doctors here who no longer accept Medicaid, so it's not unreasonable to assume their practices won't be able to survive when everything is mandated by the government.
In the U.S., treatments and survival rates for cancers and other diseases are better than in France. And isn't that the bottom line? Universal care doesn't make sense economically or medically.
"France controls health costs." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 14A.
In the U.S., the personal tax rate tops out at around 36%. In France, it's 50%. In France, employers contribute 12.8% of employee compensation for national health insurance. Add that to the 7.65% employers are already paying for social security/medicare, and you will probably price some people out of their jobs.
In France, chronic deficits have forced the government to add large amounts of tax revenue to health insurance financing, including a 5.25% income tax surcharge -- they pay tax on their tax. The situation is so unsustainable, according to the head of the Department of Health Policy and Management at the Institute of Political Studies in Paris, that the French government will either have to raise employee contributions or limit national health insurance to the 10 million people with chronic illnesses.
In France, Elizabeth Dutertre needed surgery to correct double vision. She was lucky the first time -- she was able to have the surgery two months after the diagnosis. When she needed a second surgery, however, she was told it would be two years. She opted to take care of it herself and had the surgery in three weeks. In the U.S. however, though Obama denies it, we are headed for mandatory government health care. No one will have the option to go private.
Doctors in France are opting out of the national health care and giving up government pensions in the process because the government-set fees aren't enough to cover their expenses. Will the same happen in the U.S.? I know of several doctors here who no longer accept Medicaid, so it's not unreasonable to assume their practices won't be able to survive when everything is mandated by the government.
In the U.S., treatments and survival rates for cancers and other diseases are better than in France. And isn't that the bottom line? Universal care doesn't make sense economically or medically.
"France controls health costs." The Dallas Morning News; May 17, 2009; p. 14A.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Duh!
If you're going to be a smart-aleck, you should at least be smart. Gene Furlong of Dallas wrote this pithy little letter to the editor:
"Driving through Highland Park recently made me realize how bad their economy is. I saw a poodle on a leash that wasn't wearing clothes."
In the first place, seems like Gene's got a bad case of class envy. In the second place, what he wrote isn't funny. In the third place, I've never before seen a leash wear clothes.
"HP economy hit hard." The Dallas Morning News; April 29, 2009; p. 12A.
"Driving through Highland Park recently made me realize how bad their economy is. I saw a poodle on a leash that wasn't wearing clothes."
In the first place, seems like Gene's got a bad case of class envy. In the second place, what he wrote isn't funny. In the third place, I've never before seen a leash wear clothes.
"HP economy hit hard." The Dallas Morning News; April 29, 2009; p. 12A.
Friday, June 5, 2009
What can you say and when can you say it?
Our Supreme Court made a good decision in April -- the FCC has the right to fine broadcasters when they allow certain expletives to hit the airwaves. But the vote was close -- 5-4. I see that changing if Obama gets more than one new justice pick.
Just imagine what it will be like then -- you won't be able to say, "Jesus" or "God" on the air, but you will be able to take His name in vain and use the "f" and "s" words all you want. What an enlightened society we will be then!
"Justices apply soap to TV foul mouths." The Dallas Morning News; April 29, 2009; p. 6A.
Just imagine what it will be like then -- you won't be able to say, "Jesus" or "God" on the air, but you will be able to take His name in vain and use the "f" and "s" words all you want. What an enlightened society we will be then!
"Justices apply soap to TV foul mouths." The Dallas Morning News; April 29, 2009; p. 6A.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
And this is a good thing?
I just heard an ABC report on Obama's trip to the Middle East to "reach out" to Muslim nations. The news correspondent in Egypt was gushing over Obama as news correspondents generally do. He said that when the people on the streets there heard the name Obama, they would break into smiles and nod their heads with, "Obama! Obama!"
The correspondent says this is not due to the color of Obama's skin or to his Muslim name. Rather it is because these people know that Obama will bring U.S. policy much closer to their own.
By the way, Obama also said on French TV that America could be considered one of the largest Muslim nations -- after he denied earlier this year that we are a Christian nation. Heaven help us!
The correspondent says this is not due to the color of Obama's skin or to his Muslim name. Rather it is because these people know that Obama will bring U.S. policy much closer to their own.
By the way, Obama also said on French TV that America could be considered one of the largest Muslim nations -- after he denied earlier this year that we are a Christian nation. Heaven help us!
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Being too broad-minded can get you into trouble!
In April, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted against accepting openly gay pastors. Good for them! Unfortunately, the vote was much closer this time than it was the last time the gay folks forced it.
Tricia Dykers Koenig (is that name appropriate, or what?) said, "The big story here is that many traditionally conservative areas of the country voted to accept gay clergy and lay officers in the church. Our image of what it means to be created in the image of God is broadening."
When I read that quote, I immediately thought of this scripture: "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat" Matthew 7:13. Maybe her image is broadening, but I don't think God's is.
"Presbyterians reject openly gay clergy." The Dallas Morning News; April 28, 2009; p. 3B.
Tricia Dykers Koenig (is that name appropriate, or what?) said, "The big story here is that many traditionally conservative areas of the country voted to accept gay clergy and lay officers in the church. Our image of what it means to be created in the image of God is broadening."
When I read that quote, I immediately thought of this scripture: "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat" Matthew 7:13. Maybe her image is broadening, but I don't think God's is.
"Presbyterians reject openly gay clergy." The Dallas Morning News; April 28, 2009; p. 3B.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
How long are we going to allow this to go on?
The Alameda County School District in California has instituted a homosexual curriculum for grades K-5. Parents may not opt-out for their kids. School board member Tracy Jensen said, "We are not telling anyone what to think." Of course they are! That's why the classes are mandatory! A woman who examined the curriculum said, "This curriculum ignores the fact that every child has a mom and a dad, to redefine ideas like 'family.' . . . students have to embrace highly controversial social values or risk being labeled as bigots . . . It's social activism."
Here's what they'll be brainwashing the kiddies with:
In first grade, students will read "Who is in a Family?" By Robert Skutch. It explores different types of families. One page states, " … Robin's family is made up of her dad, Clifford, her dad's partner, Henry, and Robin's cat, Sassy." Teachers will ask children to "identify and describe a variety of families" and "to understand that families have some similarities and some differences." "If a student responds that one family in the book is made up of a mother, a father and two children and a cat, you may acknowledge that some families look like this," the curriculum states. Does that sound to you that they don't like a normal family -- that there's something work with it?
Second grade students will read about two homosexual penguins that raise a young chick in the book "And Tango Makes Three" by J. Richardson and P. Parnell. When the male penguins nurture an egg, it soon hatches. "We'll call her Tango," it states, "because it takes two to make a Tango." But not two males!
3rd grade students will watch 'That's a Family' featuring some homosexual couples in addition to traditional families. According to the lesson plan, it aims to "assist students in developing sensitivity to gay and lesbian family structures" and teach "respect and tolerance for every type of family." But what about parents who don't want their children to "respect and tolerate" what God has called an abomination?
Fourth graders will be required to read an essay titled, "My School is Accepting -- but Things Could be Better" by Robert, an 11-year-old who has two lesbian mothers. Teachers are instructed to ask, "How do you think Robert feels when he hears people say things like, 'this is gay' or 'You're so gay'?" Well, Robert should feel embarrassed! Robert should be taught that his "family" is not normal.
By fifth grade, students learn to "identify stereotypes about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people." They are told that "LGBT people have made important contributions within the United States and beyond." Teachers are asked to write the acronym LGBT and ask students the meaning of each letter. Students discuss why stereotypes are "incorrect and hurtful" to LGBT people and people with LGBT family members. In the first place, most stereotypes are NOT incorrect. There's a reason they become stereotypes -- they're largely true! If you've never had your gay-dar go off, you probably are oblivious to most things around you. The children are provided with a list of famous LGBT people, including novelist James Baldwin, singer Elton John, comedian Ellen Degeneres, pop singer Christina Aguilera, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, poet Walt Whitman, singer Lance Bass, figure skater Rudy Galindo, homosexual politician Harvey Milk, Army veteran Jose Zuniga and basketball player Sheryl Swoopes. Yeah, let's teach our kids that all these perverts are heroes, and they should aspire to be perverts, too!
As Christians and normal heterosexual people, we better start standing up and doing something about this. The homosexual agenda is sending this country down the tubes, and it's doing it fast!
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=529992
Here's what they'll be brainwashing the kiddies with:
In first grade, students will read "Who is in a Family?" By Robert Skutch. It explores different types of families. One page states, " … Robin's family is made up of her dad, Clifford, her dad's partner, Henry, and Robin's cat, Sassy." Teachers will ask children to "identify and describe a variety of families" and "to understand that families have some similarities and some differences." "If a student responds that one family in the book is made up of a mother, a father and two children and a cat, you may acknowledge that some families look like this," the curriculum states. Does that sound to you that they don't like a normal family -- that there's something work with it?
Second grade students will read about two homosexual penguins that raise a young chick in the book "And Tango Makes Three" by J. Richardson and P. Parnell. When the male penguins nurture an egg, it soon hatches. "We'll call her Tango," it states, "because it takes two to make a Tango." But not two males!
3rd grade students will watch 'That's a Family' featuring some homosexual couples in addition to traditional families. According to the lesson plan, it aims to "assist students in developing sensitivity to gay and lesbian family structures" and teach "respect and tolerance for every type of family." But what about parents who don't want their children to "respect and tolerate" what God has called an abomination?
Fourth graders will be required to read an essay titled, "My School is Accepting -- but Things Could be Better" by Robert, an 11-year-old who has two lesbian mothers. Teachers are instructed to ask, "How do you think Robert feels when he hears people say things like, 'this is gay' or 'You're so gay'?" Well, Robert should feel embarrassed! Robert should be taught that his "family" is not normal.
By fifth grade, students learn to "identify stereotypes about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people." They are told that "LGBT people have made important contributions within the United States and beyond." Teachers are asked to write the acronym LGBT and ask students the meaning of each letter. Students discuss why stereotypes are "incorrect and hurtful" to LGBT people and people with LGBT family members. In the first place, most stereotypes are NOT incorrect. There's a reason they become stereotypes -- they're largely true! If you've never had your gay-dar go off, you probably are oblivious to most things around you. The children are provided with a list of famous LGBT people, including novelist James Baldwin, singer Elton John, comedian Ellen Degeneres, pop singer Christina Aguilera, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, poet Walt Whitman, singer Lance Bass, figure skater Rudy Galindo, homosexual politician Harvey Milk, Army veteran Jose Zuniga and basketball player Sheryl Swoopes. Yeah, let's teach our kids that all these perverts are heroes, and they should aspire to be perverts, too!
As Christians and normal heterosexual people, we better start standing up and doing something about this. The homosexual agenda is sending this country down the tubes, and it's doing it fast!
http://www.onenewsnow.com/Education/Default.aspx?id=529992
Monday, June 1, 2009
More Diversity.
On April 23, I wrote about how much diversity there was in the people Obama was appointing to key positions. "The Obama Women," as they are called, are mostly black women. However, last month Obama added some more diversity as he picked a white woman to be the new consumer safety chief, and of course, Judge Sotomayor, a hispanic, for the Supreme Court. On his Supreme Court pick, there were four women and one man on the short list -- the man didn't even get an interview.
Do you think Obama picks so many women because he's a little intimidated by men? Do you think he's picking them because he thinks they're not as smart as he is? Do you think he's picking them because he thinks they'll do whatever he says without question? Or do you think he's picking them because Michelle told him to?
"Obama picks new consumer safety chief." The Dallas Morning News; May 6, 2009; p. 9A.
Do you think Obama picks so many women because he's a little intimidated by men? Do you think he's picking them because he thinks they're not as smart as he is? Do you think he's picking them because he thinks they'll do whatever he says without question? Or do you think he's picking them because Michelle told him to?
"Obama picks new consumer safety chief." The Dallas Morning News; May 6, 2009; p. 9A.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)