from Mike and Curt at Flopping Aces

At the Democrats convention in 2004 former President Carter said:”The United States has alienated its allies, dismayed its friends and inadvertently gratified its enemies by proclaiming a confused and disturbing strategy.”

The need for America to work with allies was a key plank in the Democrats 2004 platform. You couldn’t get through a John Kerry speech without being lectured on the need to work with our allies and not engage in unilateral or pre-emptive action.

But, two years later, Carter was giving an interview to a British newspaper where he insulted British Prime Minister Tony Blair by calling him “compliant and subservient” to Washington.

So much for alienating our allies and dismaying our friends.

If this were an isolated example we might overlook it. Yet this insulting tone laid out by Carter pervades Democrat circles, especially in the House of Representatives where Speaker Pelosi refused to allow a vote on a resolution in support of our most stalwart Ally Britain in the matter of their personnel being held hostage by Iran.

“The leadership discussed it and agreed that inserting Congress into an international crisis while ongoing would not be helpful,” Pelosi’s spokesman Brendan Daly said.

Yet Speaker Pelosi is in the Middle East along with a delegation that includes Keith Ellison, the first Muslim member of Congress, and plans to visit Syria, a nation directly responsible for fueling the violence in Iraq that has claimed the lives of so many American soldiers.

CBS News describes the trip as “controversial” and it “indicates she has no intention of letting the White House have the sole province on foreign policy.”

Talk about alienating our allies, dismaying our friends and inadvertently gratifying our enemies by proclaiming a confused and disturbing strategy!

It used to be that we lived by the late Senator Vandenberg’s rule that “politics stops at the water’s edge.” But like with so much else, not least of which is the U.S. Constitution which grants the President sole control over foreign policy, standards of conduct, like rules and law are actively redefined to suit Democrats whose confusion over the meaning of the word “is” is legendary.

Resolution of Support For Britain

What would be so wrong with a resolution supporting our ally Britain?

H. RES. 267

Calling for the immediate and unconditional release of British marines and sailors held captive by Iran , and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 26, 2007
…
Whereas Great Britain remains one of the strongest allies of the United States and a partner in the war on terrorism: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives–

(1) condemns the Islamic Republic of Iran for the seizure of 15 British marines and sailors and demands their unconditional release; and

(2) calls on the United Nations Security Council to condemn this seizure and explore new sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran , including the restriction of the supply of gasoline, to prevent further Iranian hostile action, deny Iran’s ability to militarize the Persian Gulf, and enforce Iran’s nonproliferation commitments.

Pelosi’s spokesman Brendan Daly said the speaker was reluctant to weigh in on the incident without knowing that such a message would do more good than harm.

How could a statement of support for our greatest ally do more harm than good? Unless of course it would upset the Syrians and their Iranian masters on the eve of the Speaker’s trip to grovel in Damascus? Failing to take even this easy action, as the Senate did unanimously on Thursday, sends a further signal to the Iranians that they can continue to exploit our political divisions.

To paraphrase President Carter’s prescient remarks: The Speaker and Democrats have alienated our allies, dismayed our friends and inadvertently gratified our enemies by proclaiming a confused and disturbing strategy.

Abandoning Those Who Choose Liberty

As Nancy Pelosi travels to visit our enemy this article is timely:

The Kurds in Iraq are afraid they will again be left in a lurch if American troops are forced to leave next year, the Kurdistan representative to the United States said Thursday.

If the U.S. leaves early and does not protect the Kurds, it will be the third time in a little more than three decades the ethnic group will have been betrayed by the United States, Qubad Jalal Talabany said during an afternoon sit-down interview with the Herald/Review. Earlier Thursday morning, Talabany spoke to nearly 350 people during the last day of a three-day Training and Doctrine Command Cultural Awareness Summit.

In 1974, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger led the United States away from supporting a Kurdish homeland.

After the first Gulf War against Iraq in the early 1990s, “we believed (President George) Bush senior,” Talabany said. When the current President George H.W. Bush’s father called for Iraqis to rise up against Saddam Hussein and promised support, the Kurds and Shiites in southern Iraq did, only to see the United States turn its back.

The end result was Hussein killed thousands of Kurds and caused others to flee into the Turkish mountains for protection, where many died of exposure.

“We didn’t trust theIf the United States decides to pull out before the job is done, “we Kurds want guarantees we will be protected,” he said.

But with the full commitment of American forces finally toppling Hussein in 2003, Kurds once again were willing to take a chance on America.

The United States pull out before the job is done? Unthinkable 70 years ago, now….a completely different story. Now we have citizens of this great country who could care less about the honor, the sacrifice, and the blood spilled to make this country great. They care only about their own little world. “What can they do for me?”

Power is all that matters to so many of our leaders on the left. Are there some of those types on the right? Definitely. But the majority, hell 99% of them exist on the left side of the aisle as evidenced by the passage of this cowardly cutting and running bill.

It’s disgraceful what this great country becomes when Democrats get into power.

the leader of Cambodia in 1975, wrote a letter to the US Ambassador John Dean as Mr. Dean made plans to evacuate him and his family out of the country in which the US would no longer help:

Dear Excellency and friend,

I thank you very sincerely for your letter and for your offer to transport me towards freedom. I cannot, alas, leave in such a cowardly fashion.

As for you and in particular for your great country, I never believed for a moment that you would have this sentiment of abandoning a people which has chosen liberty. You have refused us your protection and we can do nothing about it. You leave us and it is my wish that you and your country will find happiness under the sky.

But mark it well that, if I shall die here on the spot and in my country that I love, it is too bad because we are all born and must die one day. I have only committed the mistake of believing in you, the Americans.

Please accept, Excellency, my dear friend, my faithful and friendly sentiments.

Sirik Matak.

He was executed within days of the Khmer Rouge taking power.

Will we allow another “Prince Matik” to take place in Iraq?

by Haider Ajina

The following is an article from MNF-IRAQ (Multi National Force Iraq)

‘Security, humanitarianism, judicial standards enforce Fardh Al-Qanoon (Baghdad operation ‘Rule of Law’) Thursday, 29 March 2007’

Rear Adm. Mark I. Fox, communications chief for Strategic Effects Multi-National Force-Iraq, and James L. Santelle, justice attaché U.S. Embassy Baghdad talk about progress that was made in Iraq. Photo provided by Spc. Jennifer Fulk, Combined Press Information Center.BAGHDAD — A press conference discussing Iraq’s progress was held at the Combined Press Information Center in the International Zone Monday.

Rear Adm. Mark I. Fox, communications chief for Strategic Effects Multi-National Force-Iraq, and James L. Santelle, justice attaché, U.S. Embassy, Baghdad, talked about security, humanitarianism and judicial progress.

“Together, Iraqi and Coalition forces are clearing the streets of insurgent activity and taking back the neighborhoods of Baghdad, block by block,” said Fox.

He also said that Iraqi and Coalition forces are working hard to secure progress and to provide hope for the people of Iraq in order to build better communities. This relationship Iraqi and Coalition forces are building with Iraqi citizens, he said, has already begun bearing results. The people of Iraq, Fox added, continue to be the best source of intelligence on insurgent activity. “Tips provided to Iraqi security and Coalition forces help us find and clear more caches,” said Fox.

Last week, clearing operations began in the Baghdad neighborhoods of southern Ghazalia and Amiriyah, he continued. “Approximately 1,600 Iraqi security and Coalition Force Soldiers conducted precision raids against multiple known terrorist targets and then quickly transitioned to clearing neighborhoods house by house,” Fox said.

Over the course of the operation, 31 individuals were detained; two weapons caches were discovered, along with containers of nitric acid and chlorine. In addition to security patrols, Iraqi security and Coalition forces have aided the people through humanitarian needs. “Providing security is more than just seizing weapons from the hands of murderers and terrorists,” said Fox. “It’s providing basic services to begin building a community.” For example, Iraqi security and Coalition forces used an Amadiyah city schoolhouse as a temporary medical clinic, which provided treatment to more than 100 local residents, Saturday, he said.

“This was the first large-scale humanitarian aid project conducted in Adhamiya city since Fardh Al-Qanoon operations began,” Fox said. Along with humanitarian and security control, in order for Fardh Al-Qanoon to be a success, the judicial system needs to progress as well. “Evenhanded justice is an essential part of every democratic society,” said Fox. “After decades of a brutal dictator’s repressive regime, the Iraqi government is creating an independent judicial system to ensure that the rule of law applies to everyone.”

Emphasizing what Fox said about rule of law, Santelle explained the basis of these laws was that all Iraqis, regardless of religious differences, would be treated equally and fairly.

“Rule of law is a critically important part of the united Iraqi-Coalition forces effort to preserve the peace, and to ensure the safety and security for all Iraqis here in this nation,” said Santelle. Though progress is being made overall, Fox said continuing to build toward a unified Iraq will not come easy, that providing hope will take more than military success – but “patience, resolve and commitment.”

(By Spc. Scott Kim, Combined Press Information Center)

My comments,
The further confirmation of strong progress of operation ‘Rule of Law’ or what we call ‘The Surge’ comes from press releases from our own forces through their web page http://www.mnf-iraq.com/. I read from many sources in Iraq that the participation from the local civilians is overwhelming and extremely encouraging. It appears that the local citizens are feeling confident enough in our & the Iraqi forces. They see security forces staying around to enforce the law and protect civilians from terrorist retaliation. This retaliation was a big problem in the past. In previous operations often as soon as the security force cleared an area and left it the terrorist would return, retaliate and punish all who helped the security forces. Obviously now this is not the case. With the increase in numbers of newly trained Iraqi security and our forces we are able to stay in an area we secured to maintain the security and support the locals. This is in fact how the Mehdi army grew in popularity and support. At the liberation when security & services started declining early members of the Mehdi army filled that void and gained popularity and political power. Now that the Iraqi government has the increased numbers of newly trained security forces (mostly Iraqi Army trained by us) the need for these militia groups is annulled. This also reduces the stress on the Sunni population who felt threatened by Shiite militia.

More updates on operation ‘Rule of Law or Fardh Al-Qanoon’, show that the four weeks since the start of the operation is showing substantial improvement in security in this city of 3-5 million. Reports in substantial reduction in violence and improvement in security are resonating throughout the areas of operation. While speaking to my family in Iraq, I am finding out that security in the area of operation has improved by as they put it ‘an unimaginable margin’.

from LGF

Utterly reeking with pomposity and self-importance, CNN’s Baghdad bureau chief gives us a look into the mindset of the mainstream media, in which the suicide bomber’s story is just as important as anyone else’s: Perry: A Baghdad bomb site everyone should see. (Hat tip: Steve.)

In my imagination, standing in the room, I’m reenacting the bomber’s morning. In my head, the man kisses his family goodbye, calmly gets into his car and possibly drives to work — maybe to meet his contact inside this place, passing through various checkpoints. Perhaps he drove past Iraqi police, Iraqi militiamen, U.S. military patrols. Who knows? In my mind, he says a quick prayer, walks through the front door and tries to assassinate a high-ranking member of the Iraqi government — willing to kill himself. …

I take the tape out of the camera and shove it under my flak jacket. We make our way back out of the compound. Everyone but us has weapons drawn.

Back in the bureau, the tape is edited into video so CNN anchor Kyra Phillips can start going live on the story. Her job is to simply tell the story of what happened to the world, so we can remove what I call “chosen ignorance.”

Everyone in the world should know what that room looked like. Once they see it, no one can ignore the reality of this situation. Kyra starts her live shots, showing the small snippets of video from the scene, and holding up a small ball bearing from the suicide bomber’s vest. The live shots go on for hours — as they should. Her voice is the voice for those who can no longer speak. …

All over the world, members of the news media choose to stand in horrible rooms or dangerous regions to act as megaphones. We tell the story of people who cannot tell their own. It’s not all refugee camps and starving kids. Sometimes, it’s a man who kills himself in order to kill others — and his story is as important as any other story we can ever tell.

Here is a number of stories the Communist News Network could have covered…

*A mob in Tehran called for the execution of the 15 British hostages being held by the mullahs.

*Ethiopian Muslims Beat Christian Evangelist to Death in Mosque

….but somehow covering the War on Terror from the Pro-Terrorist side was more important.

Personally, my favorite story is Rosie came out on the View today to tell her millions of viewers that 9-11 was an inside job. As LGF said, this bull@#it will continue until we stop watching it.

by Kathy at misterpolitics.com

King Abdullah, an ally of the United States; during a speech at the Arab League summit denounced American military presence in Iraq by calling it an “illegitimate foreign occupation” and then threaten Israel with war.

The Saudi monarch’s speech was a strongly worded lecture to Arab leaders that their divisions had helped fuel turmoil across the Middle East, and he urged them to show unity. But in opening the Arab summit, Abdullah also nodded to hardliners by criticizing the U.S. presence in Iraq.

“In beloved Iraq, blood is flowing between brothers, in the shadow of an illegitimate foreign occupation, and abhorrent sectarianism threatens a civil war,” said the king, whose country is a U.S. ally that quietly aided the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

The US responds with “surprise” and is seeking “clarification” to the remarks.

For a second straight day, Washington firmly rejected the king’s description of the US presence in strife-torn Iraq as “an illegitimate foreign occupation”, the US denying both that it was illegitimate or even an occupation.

“We were a little surprised to see those remarks. We disagree with them,” the US State Department’s number three, Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, told the US Congress.

“Obviously, we will seek clarification,” he said, noting the annual United Nations vote approving the US troop presence and suggesting that the king’s comments could have been misconstrued or misreported.

And then threatened Israel with war:

Saudi Arabia made clear that there would be no diplomatic openings toward the Jewish state and warned of the likelihood of war if Israel does not fully accept Arab terms. […]

“It has never been proven that reaching out to Israel achieves anything,” Prince Saud said. “Other Arab countries have recognized Israel, and what has that achieved? The largest Arab country, Egypt, recognized Israel, and what was the result? Not one iota of change happened in the attitude of Israel towards peace.”

Do I really need to point out that since he was speaking to other Arabs and that this was the truth as he REALLY sees it, not what he tells our diplomats. Seeking clarification will only get the same Saudi Arabia diplomatic lies.
(more…)

from Curt at Flopping Aces

The LA Times ran a piece in which they study how the next few months are going to go with the bill to fund the troops:

Norman J. Ornstein, who studies relations between Congress and the White House at the American Enterprise Institute, said the confrontation would “play out over months, no matter what,” and that the “crunch probably won’t come until August.”

“If you get a confrontation over an emergency [spending bill], presidents almost always win those. He has the bully pulpit of saying, ‘They’re trying to tie my hands, blackmail me and cut off funds.’ He can prevail for a while,” Ornstein said.

Moreover, refusing to compromise also would buy the president more time for his “surge” strategy to show benefits on the ground in Iraq.

If the scenario plays out as expected, the Senate will vote today to adopt an emergency war spending bill that sets a nonbinding timetable for withdrawal. Then, Senate and House negotiators will draw up a compromise version of the legislation — the House’s timetable was binding — and send it to the White House.

When that compromise arrives, probably shortly after Congress returns from its spring recess in mid-April, Bush is expected to veto it.

At that point, each will try to lay the blame at the other’s feet. How successful they are may largely depend on how the confrontation was framed in the public mind.

“Both sides have an interest in gaining the upper rhetorical hand with the public,” Gergen said. “Bush wants to paint [the Senate bill] as an avenue to defeat, and the Democrats say the opposite.” The Democrats argue that Bush “is not accepting any limitations or boundaries on the war.”

One tool the Democrats could use would be to pass temporary spending extensions, known as continuing resolutions, for 30 days or so at a time. That would enable them to avoid the charge that they have cut off funding for the troops while keeping the heat on the White House to compromise.

Of course the LAT’s being the LAT’s they couldn’t let a whole article go without putting in some anti-Bush digs:

“In the long run, we’ve had four years of the war,” Ornstein said, noting recent polls that show two out of three Americans favor setting a timetable for withdrawal. “With a super-majority sentiment that this was a disaster, Bush is going to suffer for it.”

It’s a super majority now. Yeah. I guess he is ignoring the latest Gallup poll:

Would you favor or oppose Congress taking each of the following actions in regards to the war in Iraq? How about – [RANDOM ORDER]?

A. Denying the funding needed to send any additional U.S. troops to Iraq

Favor
Oppose
No opinion

2007 Mar 23-25
36%
61
3

And when questioned about setting a timetable 60% were for the timetable…..”super majority” it is not. 50-48 itself shows that it’s not a “super majority”, but alas this is the LAT’s were talking about here. Not exactly a MSM outfit that is grounded in reality.

The Democrats just don’t get it. They will lose this fight. I have said from day one that Bush will not back down on this and either the Democrats believe they can force him to back down or they are just stupid. I vote the latter.

Do they not even understand that they cannot, CANNOT, tell the Commander In Chief how to run a war? If they believe Iraq is a disaster then use the power given to them under the Constitution, pull out all the funds for Iraq. But if they think they can dictate how the Iraq war is run they are sadly mistaken:

The Founding Fathers made the president commander in chief of the armed forces for a reason. Wars cannot be run, at least not successfully, by committee, and one decision-maker is more accountable than hundreds of members of Congress.

That fact didn’t deter the House last week from narrowly approving a measure containing objectionable features, including language constraining the way in which U.S. troops are prepared and scheduled for deployment in Iraq, as well as how and for how long they may participate in combat.

These decisions, however, are up to the president.

The House’s $124 billion Iraq spending bill – a version of which is working its way through the Senate this week – would violate the Constitution’s separation of powers principle by interfering with the president’s ability to exercise his powers as commander in chief.

The fact that the House bill also is larded with pork, including subsidies for such critical wartime industries as spinach growing and dairy farming, simply adds insult to injury. It is not every day that the Democratic leadership must bribe its own members with new spending, or even – as reported by The Politico- threaten them with yanking the earmarks for their districts, to obtain enough votes for a raid on the president’s constitutional authority.

This bill was passed by a “super majority” of 50-48 by including earmarks and pork that would have had the Democrats wailing about corruption if the roles were reversed. But do we hear that now? No. Now all of a sudden adding all this pork to buy votes is no big deal.

So let me wrap this up in a neat little package for you. The Democrats introduce a bill that dictates to our Commander In Chief how he must run this war. The bill BARELY passes by adding billions of bribes to various Senators and Congressmen, with nary a peep of protest by the left or our MSM.

The Senate likes to call itself ‘the world’s greatest deliberative body.’ If that was ever true, it certainly isn’t today. Walking away from a just fight in order to gorge on pork hardly counts as a profile in courage. Yet that’s precisely what the Democrat-dominated chamber did.

The vote was 50-48, with two Republicans — Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Gordon Smith of Oregon — joining 48 Democrats in support. One Democrat, Mark Pryor of Arkansas, voted with the 47 Republicans in opposition.

Last week, a similar measure passed the House by a 218-212 vote. It called for a U.S. troop withdrawal by the end of August 2008. The Senate bill starts the troop pullout just three months from now, with a complete withdrawal expected by March 31, 2008.

Each bill also features $24 billion in pork-barrel spending. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid kept it in to buy support from reluctant members. It’s nothing but blood money for those who otherwise might be troubled by running from a fight we can still win.

Given Congress’ runaway spending, its members’ apparent willingness to be bought off and its disgraceful abandonment of the troops, this will go down as one of the most venal votes in the last 50 years — perhaps ever.

And the bill barely passes despite the fact that we are winning in Iraq:

It is indeed striking that war critics like Sens. Harry Reid and Joseph Biden, who in 2005 were calling on the Pentagon to mount a proper counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq, and to send enough troops to make it happen, should now be seeking ways to revoke legislative authority for that very operation. Exactly why they should have changed their minds on the issue is not obvious, although they and their colleagues do claim to be expressing not only their own judgment but the opinions and sentiments of the American people at large. If recent polls are to be trusted, however, these politicians may well turn out be wrong about popular sentiment. And if past history and our current experience in Iraq are any guide, they are certainly wrong about the war on the ground.

In fact, the historical record is clear. The roots of failure in fighting insurgencies like the one in Iraq are not military. To the contrary, Western militaries have shown remarkable skill in learning and relearning the crucial lessons of how to prevail against unconventional foes, and tremendous bravery in fighting difficult and unfamiliar battles. If Iraq fails, the cause will have to be sought elsewhere.

[...]Thus far, the antiwar forces in both the United States and Europe have been greatly successful in presenting the Iraqi future in terms of an inevitable, and richly deserved, American defeat. Not even positive results on the ground have deterred them from pressing their case for withdrawal, or from winning influential converts in the heart of the U.S. Congress. If they succeed in their ultimate goal of forcing a withdrawal, they will take their place in another “long line,” joining the shameful company of those who compelled the French to leave Algeria in disgrace and to stand by as the victorious FLN conducted a hideous bloodbath, and of those who compelled America to leave Vietnam under similar circumstances and to similar effect.

Unlike the French in Algeria, the United States is in Iraq not in order to retain a colony but to help create a free, open and liberal society in a part of the world still mired in autocracy and fanaticism. Will we stay long enough to defeat the jihadists, to engage Iraqis in the process of modern nation-building, and to ease the transition to a free society? Or will we quit before the hard work is done, leaving this vital part of the world to become an al Qaeda sanctuary, bathed in chaos, anarchy, and blood? As the polls suggest, a large constituency at home is waiting to learn the answer to this question, and so is a much larger constituency abroad. But time is running short.

“Act quickly,” Gen. Petraeus wrote in January 2006, “because every army of liberation has a half-life.” This is true not only in the field but at home. James Thurber once said that the saddest two words in the English language are “too late.” Terrible as it is to think that our surge may have come too late, it is much more terrible to think that feckless politicians, out of whatever calculation, may pull the plug before the new approach is fully tested.

And terrible not only for Iraqis. For the French, the price of failure in Algeria was the collapse of one Republic and a permanent stain on the next–along with the deep alienation of the French military from the political establishment that it believed (with considerable justification) had betrayed it. Here at home, it took the American military almost a decade and a half to recover its confidence and resiliency after the failure and humiliation of Vietnam. How we would weather another and even more consequential humiliation is anybody’s guess; but the stakes are enormous, and the clock is ticking.

(If you read nothing else please read the above article in it’s entirety, a very important article about the history of counter-insurgency warfare and how we can easily win this fight, or lose it just as quickly)

The bill also gets passed with the Senators knowledge it has no chance of being signed into law.

So what can we learn from all this?
(more…)

The Maryland House of Delegates has failed to approve delegate Ron George’s legislation, HB537, prohibiting the issuance of driver’s permits to those who cannot show they are in the U. S. legally.

http://mlis.state.md.us/2007rs/billfile/hb0537.htm

Unfortunately, this essential public-safety measure was turned down by the House Judiciary Committee, just over one week ago on March 21, by a vote of 11 to 9.

House Judiciary Committee delegates Rosenberg, Dumais, Waldstreicher, Lee, Barnes, Ramirez, Kramer, Valderrama, Conaway, Anderson, and Simmons stood in the way of this long-overdue reform which MTA supported this year and last when MTA testified – - -

“Should Maryland fail to adhere to the provisions of the Real I.D. Act, Maryland residents would be barred from using their driver’s licenses for identification purposes at banks, airports, military bases, and federal installations.”

Maryland has, conservatively estimated, 250,000 illegal immigrants. In addition to bringing Maryland driver’s permits up to Federal standards by next year for use as identification for airline travel, permits should also be based on lawful presence in the U. S. both for reasons of public safety, and to ensure the integrity of the voting system. As we all know, the driver’s permit is an easy path to voting registration.

Apart from attracting to Maryland those who entered the U. S. illegally and of whom too many have little desire to assimilate, the fiscal consequences to the Free State of this legislative misstep can be very serious.

Importing low-skilled workers into the U. S. is a costly enterprise as the Heritage Foundation has pointed out in its study of amnesty proposals.

We must hold accountable those Maryland legislators who continually fail in their trust to preserve and protect the Maryland community.

Read the names of the Maryland eleven above who won’t protect us and Maryland driver’s permits.

Call the errant delegates yourself, and ask your friends in their districts to do the same. And call the committee chair Joe Vallario as well, to ask him where he stands.

Ask them why they won’t let Maryland do what most other states are already doing: requiring proof of legal presence in the US to get a driver’s permit.

by Richard Falknor
Executive Vice-President
Maryland Taxpayers Association, Inc.

Why do I hate liberalism? Reason #456: Stupid Laws
(updated today.)

Democrats Pass Legislation Giving Felons The Right To Vote

ANNAPOLIS—The Maryland Senate and House of Delegates have passed legislation to allow convicted felons to regain the right to vote after they have completed their sentences. Currently, Senate Bill 488 and House Bill 554, the so-called Voter Registration Protection Act, appear destined for the desk of Martin O’Malley to be signed into law. The Democrat majority pushed these bills through the legislature and voted down amendments that would have excluded murderers, rapists, and child molesters from this law. Maryland Republican Party Chairman James Pelura had the following comment about this bill:

“The Democrat majority has gone too far in passing legislation to allow convicted murderers, child molesters, rapists, and many other violent offenders to regain the right to vote. All of these convicted felons are people who have rejected our society and civil order. This smacks in the face of law-abiding citizens and victims everywhere.”

Source: MD GOP Press Release.

Why do I hate liberalism? Let’s see. They take away rights from law-abiding citizens ( the recently passed smoking ban) and give rights to murderers, rapists, and child molesters. I wonder what kind of laws they will support….? Do you think they will support laws or politicians that are tough on crime or on pedophiles? If you were a politician here, what kind of platform would you run on?

WCBM in Baltimore also reports that California might provide a number for commuters to report single drivers in high occupancy lanes? Is there a law that reports illegal aliens? Nope! So again, let’s harass the law abiding and protect the criminal.

But wait, our wonderfully stupid Legislature elected by this state of blue lemmings outdoes itself here.

WCBM also reports that the State legislature might force Towson State to give up it’s MBA program as it competes with predominately black Morgan State’s MBA program. (I guess whites do not need MBA’s ) If I was an African-American man, I would be offended, as it is A) reverse discrimination. and B) assumes blacks cannot compete against whites.

This is the same logic that worries about police brutality as hundreds lie every year in our city. (And the man who did nothing to stop it as Mayor has been rewarded as being promoted to Governor. )

This is the logic of the thousands of anti-American morons march in our city streets to protest the government that protects their rights and thus supports enemies of Democracy that would like nothing better to put a bullet through their thick little heads.

This is the logic that is more willing to protest to protect the life of terrorists than an innocent unborn baby.

This is the logic of those more willing to fight for homosexuality, Islam or (Name your cause here) then their own country or Christianity.

Why do I hate liberalism? No reason…..

(p.s. and for all you social justice liberals, how is this socially just?)

by Kathy at misterpolitics.com

From DiscovertheNetworks.org:

In yet another provocative claim, TV host Rosie O’Donnell implied today the Iranian seizure of British sailors was a hoax to provide President Bush with an excuse to go to war with Tehran.

In a discussion about the 15 British personnel seized Friday for allegedly entering Iranian waters, the controversial co-host of ABC’s “The View” correlated the event to the Gulf of Tonkin incident
that propelled the U.S. into the Vietnam War. President Johnson’s administration was accused of provoking one incident in 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin and making up another as a pretext for war.

O’Donnell, according to the media watchdog Newsbusters, said: “But interesting with the British sailors, there were 15 British sailors and Marines who apparently went into Iranian waters and they were seized by the Iranians. And I have one thing to say: Gulf of Tonkin, Google it. Okay.”

The U.S. and Britain, however, along with Iraq and France, contend the sailors were not in Iranian waters.

After O’Donnell’s comment, the dialogue when like this:

JOY BEHAR: Some other time. Some other time.

O’DONNELL: Well, you know…

BARBARA WALTERS: It could be a decision-making time. It’s a very difficult situation. It’s at the United Nations. It’s being examined now. Should there be sanctions? Militarily, we certainly don’t seem to be in the position to do something militarily. But it is a decision-making time.

O’DONNELL: Yes, but it’s very interesting too that, you know, these guys, they went into the water by mistake right at a time when British and American, you know, they’re two, they’re pretty much our biggest ally and we’re considering whether or not we should go into war with Iran.

BEHAR: But the U.N. was about to sanction them, also have an embargo against Iran. And the, and the timing [unintelligible] so they distracted the whole world with this.

ELISABETH HASSELBECK: Right and they may be about to expel the inspectors right now, too, which could be considered [unintelligible]
(more…)

from Curt at Flopping Aces

Big surprise here….Chuck Hagel, the man who has doomed his Presidency run even before it began….supported the cut n’ run strategy today that he opposed two weeks ago:

Senate Democrats scored a surprise victory yesterday in their bid to force President Bush to end the Iraq war, turning back a Republican amendment that would have struck a troop withdrawal plan from emergency military funding legislation.

The defection of a prominent Republican war critic, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, sealed the Democrats’ win. Hagel, who opposed identical withdrawal language two weeks ago, walked onto the Senate floor an hour before the late-afternoon vote and announced that he would “not support sustaining a flawed and failing policy,” adding: “It’s now time for the Congress to step forward and establish responsible boundaries and conditions for our continued military involvement in Iraq.”

Of course it’s now going to go to the Presidents desk where it will be promptly vetoed. No bill that includes any kind of timetable will be passed, period. The Democrats are trying to appease their masters but it will be short lived since instead of doing something constructive by oh, I don’t know, putting up a bill that has a chance to be signed, they instead are doing political theater. It’s one big show to these pukes.

Pukes maybe too good a word for them….cowards, self-serving, traitorous bastards would be better but you know me….just too nice to go down that route.

These people change their belief system, change their votes with the wind. Whichever way the money tree bends you will see them chasing after it. Not more then a few weeks ago these cowards who voted for this bill were saying: (via Redstate)

“Anyone who tells you we can set a timetable for withdrawal doesn’t understand war. And anyone who says that nothing can be done to speed a secure peace doesn’t understand America.”

“I’m bothered by dates. I think you still have to go on conditions for staying.”

“I, for example, am not in support of circling a date on a calendar and saying, ‘no matter what, we’re out on that date.’ ”

“I do not believe that it is a wise policy to set a specific date for a withdrawal from Iraq.”

But now all of sudden they all support a bill they opposed…I wonder why? Could it be from the pork?

(more…)

Schools panel discusses adding Muslim holiday (Baltimore)

A majority of the Baltimore County public school system’s calendar committee is in favor of closing schools on at least one of the most important Islamic holidays of the year, one member of the group said yesterday…

Brice Freeman, a schools spokesman who served as chairman of the calendar committee, said the group did not vote on specific recommendations but forwarded a list to Hairston of “outstanding issues” — including the Islamic holiday — raised by the panel of more than 20 members.

Yesterday, some members said it was not clear that the group had reached consensus on closing schools for Eid al-Fitr, which celebrates the end of Ramadan…

But Dr. Bash Pharoan, the Baltimore-area surgeon who has led the effort since 2004 to close schools for Islamic religious observances, issued an announcement yesterday morning that the group unanimously supported the change.

“The calendar committee members in their fourth and final meeting agreed unanimously that Islamic holidays should be treated equitably with the Jewish holidays as official school closing days for the secular reason of equity,” Pharoan’s announcement stated.

Another committee member, however, disputed Pharoan’s statement.

“There wasn’t a consensus,” said Kevin Connelly, principal of Colgate Elementary…

In an interview later, Pharoan said he is hopeful that school officials will afford the Muslim community the same deference it has given to Jews and Christians.

“I believe this request is reasonable,” said Pharoan…

During last night’s school board meeting, Hairston said the announcement distributed by Pharoan was “inaccurate.” “No recommendation has been forwarded to me,” Hairston said.

If the school system decides to close for the Islamic observance, it would become the only district in Maryland.
from the biased, lying Sun

You’ll be taught about Allah way before you will ever be taught about Jesus in our anti-Christian society.

by William M. Arkin

U.S. “black” special operations forces in Iraq have conducted as many as 300 “takedown” operations, an activity that an influential retired general calls “simply magic.” The assessment appears in an eight-page trip report written by retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey, an adjunct professor at West Point, consultant and frequent television commentator, who recently toured Iraq and Kuwait and met with U.S. commanders at all levels. Buried in the candid assessment of the war and its prospects is a rare reference to what the U.S. government euphemistically calls Other Coalition Forces-Iraq (OCF-I), the group of clandestine special operators who operate semi-independently in pursuit of high value targets.

Like all magic, though, there is also a bit of illusion here. It is beyond dispute that the United States has and needs to cultivate a force to capture or kill terrorists. The question is whether an overall strategy of “takedowns” to go after terrorists produces anything beyond a never-ending pursuit.
Adopting the name “OCF” or “other coalition forces” to mirror the CIA’s paramilitary units, often innocuously referred to as “OGA” or “other government agencies,” the United States has developed a cadre of terrorist-hunters in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Horn of Africa. All are part of the North Carolina-based Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC). JSOC’s various task forces have been known by numerous names since Sept. 11, Task Force (TF) 11, TF 121, TF 145, and TF 6-26. They have also gone by other named designations, such as Task Force Omaha. These Task Force designations change periodically for “operational security” reasons and are used to identify specific country and/or unit deployments.

According to military sources familiar with special operations organization, the current designations are Task Force 11-9, Task Force 16, and Task Force 373. Task Force 88 is also used as the overall designation for JSOC in Iraq, seemingly synonymous with OCF-I, except that OCF describes the headquarters element and includes non-U.S. forces such as British SAS rather than the assigned units. The units assigned to the OCF and making up the Task Forces are Army “Delta Force” and Navy SEAL teams, as well as various Air Force special operators and specialized clandestine intelligence units (often referred to as “Gray Fox”). These are the “Tier 1″ units. Tier 2 units, those that operate in support of JSOC and the Task Forces, include Army Rangers and special operations helicopters.
The best estimate is that there are a total of some 1,000 soldiers and civilians assigned to JSOC and its subordinate units, including a large headquarters staff comprising significant intelligence analysis and mission-preparation capabilities.

(The vast bulk of special operations forces are in the “white” world of Special Forces (Green Berets), SEALs, Air Force special operations, psychological operations and civil affairs, even Army Rangers when not assigned to clandestine missions.) Here’s what Gen. McCaffrey says about the current OCF effort in Iraq:

“The US Tier One special operations capability is simply magic. They are deadly in getting their target–with normally zero collateral damage–and with minimal friendly losses or injuries. Some of these assault elements have done 200-300 takedown operations at platoon level. The comprehensive intelligence system is phenomenal. We need to re-think how we view these forces. They are a national strategic system akin to a B1 bomber. We need to understand that the required investment level in the creation of these forces demands substantial dedicated UAV systems, intelligence, and communications resources. These special operations formations cannot by themselves win the nation’s wars. However, with them we have a tool of enormous and decisive strategic significance which has crucial importance in the global war on terrorists.” (more…)

by Kathy at misterpolitics.com

From the Examiner:

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said Monday he will try to block a Democratic effort to force troop withdrawal but won’t stand in the way of the Iraq spending bill that would contain it because he knows President Bush would veto the package.

“Our goal is to pass it quickly,” said McConnell, R-Ky. “Our troops need the money.” Unable to override Bush’s veto, Democrats would have to redraft the bill without a “surrender deadline,” he said.

Unusual way to edit a bill by forcing the Democrats to remove the “SURRENDER” politics by a veto.

The Senate faces a cliffhanging vote this week on whether to uphold the withdrawal provision in a $122 billion bill that would finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The legislation would require that Bush begin pulling out some troops right away with the goal of ending combat missions by March 31, 2008.

The Democrats seem to have forgotten about this poll showing that 59% of Americans want to win the war. 57% want troops to stay until Iraq government can maintain control and 53% think the Democrats are going to far and pushing too fast to have troops withdrawn from Iraq. As expected; Nancy and Harry have decided to ignore what the American people want and are continuing on their Anti-Victory march for American defeat in Iraq.

Still, most of the debate surrounding the measure centers on the Iraq War.The House passed a troops-pullout measure last week, but with a tougher deadline. Whereas the Senate identifies March 2008 as a goal – giving the president leeway to ignore the deadline – the House voted 218-212 to require all combat troops out as of Aug. 31, 2008.

“The United States Senate will ensure they have everything they need to continue this fight as we have done,” said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. But “we must also ensure that our soldiers have a strategy for success.”

That strategy for success Senator would be funding the troops and not setting arbitrary deadlines picked out of thin air to appease the defeatist of the Democratic party.

[…]“These Democrats believe that the longer they can delay funding for our troops, the more likely they are to force me to accept restrictions on our commanders, an artificial timetable for withdrawal and their pet spending projects. This is not going to happen,” Bush said last week.

Thank you; Mr President!

from Mike at Flopping Aces

Hey folks: I had such a nice reception on my inaugural post here. And I see from the web traffic that Flopping Aces readers were eager to get the scoop on “My Encounter with Bill and Hillary Clinton.” So, I’m back for more….

Iran’s “game of chicken” about to hit a brick wall?

Iran’s seizure of British naval personnel on a routine mission in Iraqi waters on Friday raises the stakes in the already dangerous game of chicken that Iran has been playing with the West since they seized U.S. Embassy personnel in 1979.

Both incidents as well as the killing of Americans with Iranian weapons in Iraq and the killing of Americans by Iran’s proxy Hezbollah are acts of war which carry serious risks and repercussions. Iran seems oblivious, or defiant, of that danger even going so far as to take this action on the eve of the latest vote in a series of UN Security Council resolutions “determined” to force Iran to comply with it’s obligation to forgo development of nuclear weapons.

What is Iran Up to?

It’s abundantly clear that Iran has been engaging in a war with the West ever since the Ayatollahs came to power. Their outlook doesn’t depend on who sits in the White House or what U.S. policy is towards Israel or the Palestinians.

Walid Phares wrote an interesting article over the weekend exploring some of the dynamics of the problem as viewed from a Middle Eastern perspective.

Dr. Phares reminds us that Iran has always used the “Great Satan” excuse as a mechanism for controlling Iran’s restive population. Despite that excuse rising protests and democratic activism are increasingly threatening the regime.

Nothing better than to goad the U.S. or Britain into an attack and use that as an excuse to clamp down on internal dissent. I’m wondering if perhaps Iran was hoping that the British would shoot back and defend themselves, as they had every right to do, and then claim that it was the British who attacked Iran?

Phares goes on to suggest that part of Iran’s strategy is to “widen the propaganda campaign against the US and its allies via a number of PR companies within the West, to portray Iran as “a victim” of an “upcoming war provoked by the US.”

We’ve already seen evidence of that PR strategy with the visit last year by former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami to Washington’s National Cathedral. And it wasn’t hard to miss the mass produced message put forward with the help of the communist organizers at the recent “anti-war” protest in Washington: ” Stop Iraq War, No Iran War, IMPEACH.”
(more…)

by Laryn

Yes, I was watching Mr. O’Reilly again with is Radicalism on Display Talking Points Memo last night as I find that I can switch between his dull segments and more interesting fare with things like Mythbusters and Dirty Jobs re-runs on the Discovery Channel, or any of the Modern Marvels re-runs at the History Channel. Having to wade through the latest in Anna Nichole or whatever comely young woman has gone missing is a bit much, at times, so the snoozy limited attention span does help! But this did catch my attention before I nodded off on the sofa, from Mr. O’Reilly’s memo du jour:

A few days ago in Portland, Oregon, a so-called peace rally featured masked American haters, who chanted things like “No Gods, No Country, No Masters”. They also burned the American flag and effigies of American soldiers, if you can believe it, all the while chanting “fascist wars are nothing new, it’s not just Bush the soldiers too:”

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CROWD: It’s not just Bush it’s soldiers too! Fascist war is nothing new! It’s not just Bush it’s soldiers too! Fascist war is nothing new!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

Now this disgusting display was given a happy face by the committed left Oregonian newspaper, which mentioned the radicalism but said overall the protest was “family friendly.” Yes, if you’re ” The Sopranos.”

Now this kind of exposition could not have happened four years ago in America, even in ultra- liberal Portland. Mass hoodlums running around disrespecting USA would have been confronted by the media and perhaps by people on the street.

But Iraq has changed everything in this country. According to a new Wall Street Journal poll, only 43 percent of Americans believe the USA should take military action against Iran if it develops a nuclear weapon. An astounding 47 percent of us say let Iran have the nukes! It’s not worth a fight.

Again, four years ago — inconceivable. The chaos in Iraq has had so many unintended consequences, I can’t even list them. But there is no question, the USA has turned to the left and the radical left is now emboldened.

Well! I do fear that Mr. O’Reilly has been asleep on the set if he actually *believes* that. No flag burnings and hoodlums doing things? Really? Then how does he account for this bit from an account on a 05 JAN 2002 protest in Portland:

12:43 pm Rumour has it that people have been asked to stay in their houses, and more riot cops are lining up along MLK…Unconfirmed reports of arrests . Crowd has swelled to nearly 1000.[Ed note: it was reported ;ater that in actuality the rally at park swelled from 300 to 500 by noon and there were around 500 people marching to the YO center]
12:45 pm At least one, possibly 3 people have been arrested.
12:48 pm Confirmed that one arrest has been made–{Ed note: evening news reported that 2 arrests were made at the first location and 1 at the second , all charged with interfering with the police] a woman that walked gone around the block, via Cook, 1 block south and the East of MLK, and was arrested at Fargo and MLK. Crowd is on east side of MLK, in southbound lane, and is surrounded on lane side, and the south side by riot police, and the opposite lane is lined with riot police, armed with at least 2 tear gas guns, and one beanbag gun
12:55 pm Infernal Noise Brigade has arrived!!
1:04 pm Infernal Noise Brigade is playing at the front of the crowd, entertaining the riot cops.
1:16 pm A flag is being burned!
1:20 pm An interview with a local resident: the resident got a phone call at 9:30 am saying that if residents left their houses today, there would be no guarantee when they would be able return to their homes.
1:34 pm PPRC {Ed note: it is not clear whether the person with the megaphone was actually speaking on behalf of PPRC] report over the megaphone is that the speaking engagement at YO has been CANCELLED!! The marchers are in vacant lots right now, mobilizing and organizing rides to get to the next meeting place near to Parkrose High School.
1:49 pm Looks like the “reliable source” was misinformed; Corporate media tried to tell megaphone people that the speaking engagement had not been cancelled, but by then most people had left. 30-50 people were remaining near the YO center when the Presidential motorcade pulled into the YO center. Someone walking away with a little girl is yelling “f**king hippies”.
Yes, President Bush was there to talk about forest management and logging! Flag burning, blocking streets and riot police get called out over forestry management. And that is in 2002.

A bit later that year on 22 AUG 2002 another demonstration was held when the President was in town to support a State Senator. Here is an excerpt of an account from that demonstration:
(more…)

Democrats Pass Legislation Giving Felons The Right To Vote

ANNAPOLIS—The Maryland Senate and House of Delegates have passed legislation to allow convicted felons to regain the right to vote after they have completed their sentences. Currently, Senate Bill 488 and House Bill 554, the so-called Voter Registration Protection Act, appear destined for the desk of Martin O’Malley to be signed into law. The Democrat majority pushed these bills through the legislature and voted down amendments that would have excluded murderers, rapists, and child molesters from this law. Maryland Republican Party Chairman James Pelura had the following comment about this bill:

“The Democrat majority has gone too far in passing legislation to allow convicted murderers, child molesters, rapists, and many other violent offenders to regain the right to vote. All of these convicted felons are people who have rejected our society and civil order. This smacks in the face of law-abiding citizens and victims everywhere.”

Source: MD GOP Press Release.

Why do I hate liberalism? Let’s see. They take away rights from law-abiding citizens ( the recently passed smoking ban) and give rights to murderers, rapists, and child molesters. I wonder what kind of laws they will support….?

Why do I hate liberalism? No reason…..

(p.s. and for all you social justice liberals, how is this socially just?)

Good News….Yesterday, Jessica’s Law was passed in both the House and Senate of Maryland. Thanks to everyone’s phone calls, prayers, and emails, this will soon become law. The bills passed by the House and Senate were identical, so final approval should not be any problem. A spokesman for the Governor’s office has said the Governor supports the bill and will sign it.

Classic:

by Kathy at misterpolitics.com

From UNWatch.org:

Human Rights Nightmare

Speech before UN Human Rights Council 4th Session
23 March 2007

Delivered by Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch

Transcript of Speech:

Mr. President,

Six decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, Eleanor Roosevelt, Réné Cassin and other eminent figures gathered here, on the banks of Lake Geneva, to reaffirm the principle of human dignity. They created the Commission on Human Rights. Today, we ask: What has become of their noble dream?

(more…)

by Laryn

American forces in Iraq now hold some 300 prisoners tied to Iran’s intelligence agencies, Pajamas Media learned from both diplomatic and military sources.

This is believed, by both sources, to be a record number of prisoners tied to Iran. Virtually all were captured in the past two months.

This week’s seizure of 15 British sailors by Iran in the contested waters of the Shattab al-Arab, the ship channel that divides Iraq and Iran, may have been payback for the capture of record number of Iranian operatives inside Iraq. “It may be a bargaining chip,” one diplomatic source said.

The intelligence community is still debating whether the unlawful detainment of British sailors was ordered by Iran’s government or was presented to it as a fait accompli by relatively low-level Iranian Revolutionary Guards officers.

The roughly 300 prisoners held in Iraq—the number grows frequently—are either Iranian nationals or Shiites recruited from neighboring countries that are employed one of its almost two dozen intelligence or paramilitary services.

The record haul of Iran-linked prisoners may not be a sign of Iran’s increasing involvement in Iraq. The Islamic Republic’s participation in the Iraq war, which includes funding, arming and training both Shiite and Sunni militias, has been known to be significant for some time.

More likely, the large number of Iran-linked prisoners reflects a change in tactics following the arrival of Multinational Force Iraq commander Army Gen. David H. Petraeus. Previously, Iranians and other foreigners could not be picked up without a provable connection to terrorism. Now, American and allied forces are encouraged to seize militants based on a reasonable suspicion of involvement in insurgent attacks. This is consistent with Iraqi law.

The number of bombings associated with Iran-backed groups seems to be declining, although both sources cautioned it is too soon to be sure.

The Pentagon received “considerable pressure” from officials in the State department and CIA to release some or all of the Iran-linked prisoners to facilitate discussions between Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Iranian officials. Apparently, Gen. Petraeus sharply disagreed, saying that he intends to hold the prisoners “until they run out of information or we run out of food,” according to our sources who heard these remarks through channels.

The two sources requested anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the intelligence and developing events with Iran.

More than a month ago, Pajamas Media exclusively reported that the firebrand cleric Moqtada al-Sadr had fled to Iran in the face of the surge and that his Mahdi Army was breaking into pieces. More recently, Pajamas Media reported that a number of Mahdi Army commanders were seeking to negotiate with American forces. Now, the Associated Press is reporting the same developments.
from pajamasmedia

from Curt at Flopping Aces

I am at a loss of words to describe the utter ignorance of Sen. Chuck Hagel’s recent remarks:

Some lawmakers who complain that President Bush is flouting Congress and the public with his Iraq policies are considering impeachment an option, a Republican senator said Sunday.
Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee and a frequent critic of the war, stopped short of calling for Bush’s impeachment. But he made clear that some lawmakers viewed that as an option should Bush choose to push ahead despite public sentiment against the war.

“Any president who says ‘I don’t care’ or ‘I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else’ or ‘I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed’ — if a president really believes that, then there are … ways to deal with that,” Hagel said on ABC’s “This Week.” …

In the April edition of Esquire magazine, Hagel described Bush as someone who didn’t believe he was accountable to anyone.

“You can impeach him, and before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment,” Hagel told the magazine.

Wow….So in Chuck’s mind the Commander in Chief must yield to Congress when and how they want or they get rid of him.

I guess we can throw the Constitution out the window then huh?

The Founding Fathers made three co-equal branches for a reason nimrod. For exactly the very scenario that Chuck is now engaging in. No branch is more powerful then the other, if one doesn’t like what the other is doing they cannot just throw em out.
(more…)

….a really good read, check it out:

….in short, I am very, very tired of devout Christians claiming that they are somehow “oppressed” because they are no longer able, thanks to our Establishment Clause jurisprudence, to use the machinery of government to broadcast a particular religious view to the masses. Be grateful for the Establishment Clause, since the neutrality that it imposes on the state is likely RESPONSIBLE for the freedom with which religion flourishes in America.

Your favorite whipping boy, the ACLU, thinks so too. The following links describe cases in which the ACLU defended the rights of Christians to worship freely. I know that even more exist, but I haven’t the patience to find them. Please read every single one before you ever bash the ACLU again.

Also, try reading the Supreme Court cases that eventually held that school-led prayer was unconstitutional; the original plaintiffs in those early cases were Christian.

S.C.

My response-

Thanks, SC.

I haven’t read through all your points, but I suggest you drop the ‘Treaty of Tripoli’ argument from your forte.

1. The ‘Treaty of Tripoli’ was written in order to free some of our sailors who were being held hostage by Muslim pirates.

2. There’s disagreement over who wrote the ‘not a Christian nation’ line in the first place. See here

3. The treaty was deratified.

4. A deratified treaty is not the equal of our founding documents, which mention God and providence many times over.

Whenever I see someone mention ‘Tripoli’ it’s a flag that they shouldn’t be taken seriously, even though they may have better arguments.

For what it’s worth, I agree, if that’s your point, that America is not a Christian nation. It’s a republic, which (should be) good enough. Where I think we differ is the restrictions placed upon free speech. I say, if you truly want free speech, you have to suffer Christianity even if expressed on government property and time. That’s what ‘owning government’ means. Government isn’t meant to be an impersonal monster which runs over people, it’s supposed to have a soul, and I think you’ve noticed the evidence of officials feeling instinctively that this is true when they introduce retch-worthy PC substitutes for verboten personal faith expressions, the latter of which some people will always find offensive but which work a heck of a lot better than the ‘safe’ alternative. By making government a no-man’s land of personal (religious) expression, you’ve replicated the extremes of King George to their polarity, which is just as revolution worthy. If (just for argument allow me the pronoun) ‘you’ try to shut up Christians just because you have a giant Jones against hearing what you don’t want to, and you manipulate our freedoms to achieve that end, the result will be the mess we live with now and the subsequent loss of free speech, which includes the loss of trust in government as being a reflection of our character. Promoting the fake and civil rights damaging ‘I have a right not to hear someone’s else’s free speech’ argument just shoots off your own foot and by definition restricts your own freedom.

I really hate this argument because, contrary to popular belief, I’m not a ‘Christianist’. This sounds disingenuous because I’m famously a Christian, and a bad one at that, but I know that if the religious freedom canary dies in the coalmine, other freedoms follow. Freedoms ‘granted by God’ can’t be withdrawn by man, who by nature aims lower.

You quote Jefferson in your arguments, but I could post many, many more quotes from Jefferson in favor of Christianity. Jefferson was completely free when, as the first rector of The University of Virginia, he allowed and encouraged on-campus bible study.

Jefferson was also the author of this- (more…)