"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press" 

The primary site for this blog mirror is HERE. Dissecting Leftism is HERE (and mirrored here). The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Education Watch, Immigration Watch, Food & Health Skeptic, Gun Watch, Socialized Medicine, Eye on Britain, Recipes, Dissecting Leftism and Australian Politics. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing) See here or here for the archives of this site

31 May, 2011

"Racist" to mention someone's skin color?

We read:
"Supermodel Naomi Campbell has threatened to take legal action over a Cadbury advertisement that allegedly uses her name to promote a chocolate bar.

According to reports, the catwalk beauty accuses the chocolate giant of racism after an advertising campaign that not only uses her name without permission – but also “compares her to chocolate”.

The ad for Cadbury's Bliss shows a chocolate bar surrounded by diamonds with the slogan, "Move over Naomi, there's a new diva in town".

Campbell alleges the tag line is a jibe aimed at her and claims she is deeply offended at being compared to a chocolate bar.

The supermodel's mother, Valerie Morris, is said to have echoed her daughter's concern, "I'm deeply upset by this racist advert. Do these people think they can insult black people and we just take it? This is the 21st century, not the 1950s. Shame on Cadbury"


Is using the word "retarded" hate speech?

This is something of an old chestnut now and I have no doubt that some genuinely kind-hearted people oppose use of the word. But it is once again a belief in verbal magic: The belief that if you banish the word you banish the underlying reality. That just aint so. The reality will remain and there will always be SOME word used to refer to it. And that word will always be upsetting to some.
Spend any time around school-aged students and you'll hear some of them say, "That's retarded." It's a phrase they toss around to mean something's unfair, stupid, silly.

Is using the word retarded hate speech? A new campaign says it is, and aims to rid people's vocabulary of the word.

The popular teen show "Glee" is leading the effort to explain how the word is hurtful in jokes or any part of speech.

Advocates explain on the website why the word is so hurtful when used in jokes or as part of everyday speech.

"What’s wrong with retarded? I can only tell you what it means to me and people like me when we hear it. It means that the rest of you are excluding us from your group. We are something that is not like you and something that none of you would ever want to be. We are something outside the "in" group. We are someone that is not your kind. I want you to know that it hurts to be left out here, alone," says Joseph Stephens, a Special Olympics athlete.

Sorry about that Joseph but people will always tend to pick as friends people who are like themselves. We still have the freedom to do that -- so far.

30 May, 2011

Atheists vs. American Legion: The Legality of Utah’s Highway Crosses

We read:
"Atheists continue to rail against the presence of 13 crosses on Utah’s public highways. While the legal debate between the Utah Highway Patrol and its supporters and American Atheists (the organization staunchly opposed to the crosses) has gone back and forth for some time now, a 2010 ruling declared the religious symbols “unconstitutional.”

But, the debate is far from over. Just days before the United States celebrates Memorial Day, the American Legion has announced its plans to enter into the debate in support of the crosses. For history’s sake, these markers were constructed in 1998 to memorialize fallen Utah Highway Patrol staff (marking the spots where they had perished).

An American Atheists blog responding to attacks as to why they hated crosses called the memorial monuments “highly offensive,” and that for crosses to represent troopers who could possibly be of another faith or no faith is insulting.

But according to a Christian Science Monitor article, the families of each fallen Utah trooper were consulted before the erection of the crosses and no one objected. A photo of each trooper is also used at the site.


Lawsuit Filed Against Texas School District to Stop Prayer During Graduation

We read:
"A federal lawsuit was filed Friday by the Americans United for Separation of Church and State to prevent a Texas school district from allowing prayer during graduation, according to

The suit was filed on behalf of Christa and Danny Schultz, who have two children in the Medina Valley Independent School District, including one graduating on June 4, according to the San Antonio Express.

The group wants the school district to remove a student-led invocation and benediction, but the school district says that the remarks do not violate any laws or school policy, according to the Express.


29 May, 2011

False racism accusation costs Irish airline money

We read:
"A former Miss World has been awarded £70,000 in damages after suing no-frills carrier Ryanair for defamation.

The case centred on a press release posted on Ryanair’s website in November 2008 in response to remarks Miss Davison, 27, made the previous day in a newspaper.

Asked what she thought of the lack of any Irish women in Ryanair’s 2009 charity calendar of bikini-clad cabin crew, she said: ‘If I was (organising) it, I would have made sure Irish women were involved because it’s an Irish charity and Irish fundraising.’

The airline’s release said the comments by Miss Davison, who was crowned Miss World in 2003, ‘bordered on racism and demonstrated an elitist attitude against Ryanair’s international cabin crew’.


Judge Rules Pastor Can Say 'Jesus Christ' at Memorial Day Ceremony at National Cemetery

We read:
"A federal judge in Texas ruled Thursday that the government cannot prohibit a Houston preacher from saying “Jesus Christ” while delivering an invocation at an upcoming Memorial Day ceremony to be held the national cemetery in the city.

The Rev. Scott Rainey, the pastor at Living Word Church of the Nazerene, has given the invocation at the Houston National Cemetery for the last two years, each time ended the prayer with a reference to Jesus.

But a month ago, Arleen Ocasio, the director of the cemetery, asked to review Rainey's prayer before the ceremony this Monday, according to court papers. The pastor agreed, but four hours later, she responded with an email saying that “while it was very well written” she asked that it commemorate “veterans from all cultures and religious beliefs” -- in other words, not just those who believe in Jesus.

Rainey called Ocasio, and she told him that if he didn't change the prayer, he would not be allowed to deliver the Memorial Day remarks, Rainey said in his lawsuit against the federal cemetery.

The pastor eventually sued the U.S. Veterans Affairs Department to be allowed to refer to Jesus Christ at the invocation.

Judge Lynn N. Hughes sided with Rainey, ruling that censorship and religious discrimination violate the First Amendment.


28 May, 2011

NJ Methodists go to water over Christian symbols

Covering up Christian symbols in a church building is carrying the delegitimization of Christianity to a new extreme. And the Methodists who agreed to it show how weak in their faith Methodists have become. They are now just another pissweak "mainstream" church. Next thing they'll be replacing their communion wine with Scotch Whisky.

It seems to me a plain case of denying Christ. Jesus said, “But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven” (Matt. 10:33).
School officials in Neptune Township, N.J., have bowed to the demands of the ACLU and will cover decades-old religious signs posted in the historic Great Auditorium to allow a 70-year tradition of high school graduations to continue.

Instead of the sign, "Holiness to the Lord," a banner will be posted over it saying, "Neptune Township School District ... A Community of Learners." In addition, a banner with the words "So Be Ye Holy" will be covered with another banner saying, “Neptune High School: A School of Excellence and No Excuses."

The new banners are meant to appease the American Civil Liberties Union, which had demanded the school district remove all religious signs and symbols from the Methodist-owned auditorium in Ocean Grove, claiming it made non-Christians attending public school graduations feel uncomfortable.

The conflict began after the grandmother of one of last year's graduates complained not only about the large white cross adorning the top of the buildings' facade, but of the religious signs inside, and what she felt was a heavily religious tone to the ceremony, which included student-led invocations and the singing of Christian hymns, most notably "Onward Christian Soldiers."

The school agreed to cut out the student-led invocations and the hymns. But the 6,500-seat Great Auditorium is run by the Camp Meeting Association. It is the iconic, center piece of the Methodist Church-based organization's property, which comprises the bulk of the land in Ocean Grove.

The historical building had become the site for both civic and community events. The association agreed to cover the cross on the inside, but not the cross on the outside or the antique lighted religious signs.


Health board nixes butt billboards

We read:
"KENNEWICK, Wash. — A Tri-Cities health board reversed itself Wednesday and voted against endorsing a colon cancer awareness campaign that uses billboards saying, “What’s up your butt?”

The Tri-City Herald reports the Benton Franklin Health District commissioners responded to complaints the ads are in poor taste. The butt billboards have been displayed in Yakima to raise colorectal cancer awareness and encourage people to get screened for the disease.

The billboards were obviously effective in getting attention and were in a good cause so it seems narrow-minded to ban them

27 May, 2011

Ed Schultz: Laura Ingraham Is a ‘Right-Wing Slut’

More Leftist hate speech. Sexist too! You can imagine the Leftist media's reaction if a conservative said this about a liberal female.
"MSNBC host Ed Schultz, that reliable source of thoughtful, progressive political commentary, enlightened his radio listeners earlier this week about popular conservative talk-show host and commentator Lara Ingraham. According to Schultz, she’s a “right-wing slut.” And he didn’t just let it slip out once. No, he made sure to repeat the slur.

Schultz seems angry about Ingraham’s comments on Fox that it may not have been the greatest decision for Obama to be seen drinking beer in Ireland as Joplin, MO tried to pick up the pieces after a devastating tornado.

But as Mediaite’s Jon Bershad points out, the reasoning doesn’t really matter:

Look, if you don’t agree with something the woman says, you can feel free to call her an “idiot” or a “jerk” or a “big, stupid poop-face.” Whatever you want. Just don’t call her a slut, you big, stupid poop-face!

Leftists sure are good at dragging political debate down to the lowest possible standard.

I suppose it's something that Schultz got a short suspension over his language.

Obama doesn't even know what year it is -- signs it as 2008

This is not a free speech issue but since nobody else seems to be mentioning it, I thought I should. It would be on the front page of every newspaper coast to coast if a prominent Republican had shown this degree of disconnection from reality. Dan Quayle just had to add an extra "e" on to the spelling of "potato" for it never to have been forgotten by the media
"Everyone wishes they could turn back the clock sometimes, and it turns out Barack Obama is no different. He got the date wrong by three years when he signed the guestbook at Westminster Abbey today on his official visit to the UK - despite apparently asking the dean what day it was.

Following a tradition set by former presidents Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, he laid a wreath at the tomb of the Unknown Soldier, before going into the nave to sign a heartfelt message in the Distinguished Visitors' Book."


26 May, 2011

Did Peter Fonda Commit the Federal Offense of Threatening President Obama?

We read:
"While promoting a new documentary at the Cannes film festival in France last weekend, Peter Fonda made comments that could be construed as threats against President Obama. “I’m training my grandchildren to use long-range rifles,” the actor told The Daily Telegraph at the international film festival. “For what purpose? Well, I’m not going to say the words 'Barack Obama,' but …”

With those words, the “Easy Rider” star may have committed a federal crime. “Clearly, there is a federal law that prohibits threatening the president,” Washington, D.C.-based attorney Ross Nabatoff tells

“Now, the question is, is that a threat as opposed to him expressing his First Amendment rights? But you could conceivably construe that as a threat—he names the president. It’s a federal offense.

The fact that Fonda, 71, made his comments overseas could work in his favor should legal trouble ensue. “The federal courts may not have jurisdiction in France,” Nabatoff said.


Straight-talking Video banned by YouTube

John Hawkins is the straight talker. He sure pulls no punches. But I can't see a single point where he is factually wrong
Conservative bloggers have been saying for years that YouTube takes a pro-radical Islam slant. Videos that are pro-Israel or anti-radical Islam have been pulled again and again and again and again and again.

Yesterday, I got a taste of the same treatment when I hammered the Palestinians for their malicious and evil behavior in my latest Liberalism in 120 Seconds video on YouTube. You can’t see the video on YouTube anymore because it was banned as “hate speech,” but you can see it at MRC TV.

Moreover, conservative Republicans are called “evil” and “Nazis” on a daily basis. So are Israelis. Is YouTube going to call those videos “hate speech” and pull ‘em? No, of course not. You can lie about Republicans, conservatives, Israel and even America all you want, but if you tell the truth about the genocidal impulses of the Palestinian people and their suicide bomber culture, that’s “hate speech.”

(See the original for links & Video)

25 May, 2011

Must not laugh at the postal service

So we should cry? Makes sense.
"The U.S. Postal Service wants Americans to know that even the temptation of French toast sticks and a Double Crossain'wich wouldn't stop its letter carriers from delivering the mail on time.

After unleashing its lawyers, USPS has struck a settlement with Burger King over an ad campaign launched last year that featured a letter carrier getting distracted from his job by delicious Burger King breakfast food. Apparently, the Postal Service did not appreciate the portrayal."


"English only" is a winner

We read:
"Greg Simons, the owner of Reedy Creek Diner in North Carolina, became frustrated over his inability to communicate with non-English speaking customers. So, he took a controversial step: He posted an ‘English Only’ sign. Simons claims that the results have been unbelievable. He’s received support and acclaim from people across the nation. And, his business has been surging. Watch his explanation, below


24 May, 2011

MTV kills anti-abortion ads; group cries foul

We read:
"There’s a storm brewing between MTV and a pro-life media group supported by Sarah Palin after the music channel abruptly yanked the non-profit’s ads just a few days into the launch of a new media campaign.

Heroic Media announced its “We Can Help” campaign, which was to air on MTV and BET, at an April 30 event attended by Palin. The ads – which offer women with unexpected pregnancies useful information – began airing May 2, with plans to run for several weeks.

But MTV pulled the plug after just one airing. MTV spokeswoman Jeannie Kedas told in a email that MTV nixed the ads because of a controversial billboard campaign launched by a group with close ties to Heroic Media.

I guess they'll have to take their advertising dollars elsewhere.

Not allowed to dislike being bossed around by a woman?

So a French dancer discovers:
"A pre-dance package showed Feildel's dance partner, Alana Patience, popping into his restaurant to give him some last-minute posture pointers before this week’s performance.

The TV chef was later asked by host Daniel McPherson if he was frustrated having Patience bossing him around in his own kitchen.

Feildel replied: “The problem was that the staff around me, I usually tell them what to do. Suddenly a woman was telling me what to do in front of everyone.”

His comments were met by boos from the crowd with a visibly panicked Feildel unaware of his sexist mishap. Co-host Sonya Kruger later added fuel to the fire when the couple returned backstage and the scores were read. “It’s brilliant. But what would I know? I’m a woman,” Kruger joked.

After the show, a flustered Feildel said he did not stand by the comments and said it was a slip of the tongue. “I didn’t even know what I said before I looked and saw Todd shaking his head at me,” Feildel said. “This time I can blame it on my French accent. I didn’t mean it; in fact I quite like being bossed around by women.”

It seems to me that a woman who goes into a man's workplace and tells him how to behave is at least as insensitive as him saying that he doesn't want to be bossed around by a woman

23 May, 2011

Suppressing Speech at UC Santa Barbara

We read:
"When David Horowitz speaks about campus anti-Semitism and appeasement of radical Islam at the University of California, Santa Barbara on May 26, it will be against a backdrop of soft censorship and suppression of free speech that has come to characterize the UCSB public square.

The school’s Associated Students (AS) financial board, heavily influenced by the UCSB Muslim Students Association acting in concert with left-wing groups, illegally refused a funding request last week by the College Republicans to fund the event. After a protest by students anxious to hear Horowitz, the AS granted a part of the sum initially requested by College Republicans, but only after encouraging a campaign portraying Horowitz as a racist, Islamophobe, and practitioner of hate speech.

The May 26 speech will touch on themes similar those in a previous Horowitz lecture at Santa Barbara three years ago in which he challenged — without success — students heckling from the audience to denounce the terror group Hamas and its intention to wipe Israel, and all Jews, off the face of the map.

The memory of that confrontation was one factor that led the College Republicans’ request for $2000, for audiovisual and security expenses (and not including an honorarium) to be turned down by the Associated Students board on May 2. Citing court decisions requiring viewpoint neutrality when student fees are allocated for speakers, College Republicans protested. At a raucous public forum on May 5, the AS approved $1100 for the event. This amount was then reduced to $800 as a result of a campaign by Islamic and left groups, which also made it clear that they intended to disrupt the event.


A rapid revision of reality

The speech of an Hispanic pastor was accurately reported at the beginning of the paragraph (homosexuals “are worthy of death") but that has become transformed into “Kill the gays" by the end of the paragraph. That Christians follow the Bible and that Romans chapter 1 says that God will do the punishing, not man, is obviously too complicated for the tiny brain of the writer below.
Specifically, Reverend Ortega said, gays “are worthy of death.” The translator did not pause or miss a beat, and neither did Reverend Díaz -- who spoke just minutes later -- nor did Díaz, the elected representative of hundreds of thousands of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender constituents, bother to walk back or disavow that hate speech. It gives one pause to ask, if it’s illegal to yell, “Fire!” in a crowded theater, why isn’t it illegal to yell, “Kill the gays!” in front of a few thousand religious bigots?


22 May, 2011

Censorship happening to the Left, too

Obama is a big disappointment to doctrinaire Leftists but you are still not allowed to criticize him, says cartoonist Ted Rall, who is FAR Left
There's been a push among political cartoonists to get our work into the big editorial blogs and online magazines that seem poised to displace traditional print political magazines like The Progressive. In the past, editorial rejections had numerous causes: low budgets, lack of space, an editor who simply preferred another creator's work over yours.

Now there' s a new cause for refusal: Too tough on the president. I've heard that from enough "liberal" websites and print publications to consider it a significant trend. A sample of recent rejections, each from editors at different left-of-center media outlets:

* "I am familiar with and enjoy your cartoons. However the readers of our site would not be comfortable with your (admittedly on point) criticism of Obama."

* "Don't be such a hater on O and we could use your stuff. Can't you focus more on the GOP?"

* "Our first African-American president deserves a chance to clean up Bush's mess without being attacked by us."

I have many more like that. What's weird is that these cultish attitudes come from editors and publishers whose politics line up neatly with mine. They oppose the bailouts. They want us out of Afghanistan and Iraq. They disapprove of Obama's new war against Libya. They want Obama to renounce torture and Guantanamo.

Obama is the one they ought to be blackballing. He has been a terrible disappointment to the American left. He has forsaken liberals at every turn. Yet they continue to stand by him. Which means that, in effect, they are not liberals at all. They are militant Democrats. They are Obamabots.

Seems like Ted is not properly worshipful of Obama's skin color. The Left are OBSESSED with race, just as the socialist Hitler was.

At least Karl Marx wasn't particularly racist. He hated the Jews but he hated everyone else as well. That such a great hater is such a Leftist icon tells you a lot about the Left. If you would like to read more on the wit and wisdom of old Karl, I have a blog for that

College Students Sign Petition to ‘Ban’ Rush, Beck From Radio — But Love Free Speech!

We read:
"Oliver Darcy is doing his part to expose liberal ideas and hypocrisy on college campuses. Last month he produced two videos showing students willing to redistribute wealth but not grades and also refusing to pay their share of the national debt. Now he’s back, and this time he’s showing how college students who say they support free speech are willing to sign a petition to “ban” Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and other conservatives from the airwaves.

In the video, the students are not only willing to sign the petition, but some even offer their thoughts on Beck and those like him.

“That guy’s a douchebag,” one guy says of Beck. “He’s an a**.” “I hate them bastards,” another man says, even after telling the petition author that in America and they should have a right to say what they want. He signs the petition anyway.

On his website,, Darcy writes: "Today, many want to limit the speech of those they disagree with, primarily conservative republicans. In 1949, the Fairness Doctrine was introduced under the FCC. Under Reagan, in 1987, the FCC ended the doctrine.

While Democrat-controlled congresses have tried to make it law again, Republicans and those who support free speech oppose their efforts to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. To begin the limitation of political speech and dissent would lead us to a downward spiral of freedoms."


21 May, 2011

Must not praise referees!

Sir Alex Ferguson has spent much of the past 25 years getting in trouble with soccer authorities, but his latest brush with officialdom may be the most bizarre of his career.

The Manchester United boss has had a love/hate relationship with English Premier League referees for as long as anyone can remember. However, was this episode love or hate? Ferguson was handed a formal warning Tuesday for breaking with the habit of a lifetime and praising a leading ref.

Before United’s 2-1 victory over Chelsea on May 8, a result which all but guaranteed that the Red Devils would regain the EPL title, Ferguson spoke extensively and positively about the abilities of official Howard Webb.

“We are getting the best referee, there is no doubt about that,” Ferguson said. “But getting a bad decision is definitely our big fear. We just hope it is our turn for a bit of luck.”

The commission ruled that Ferguson had breached regulations by speaking about Webb, even in a positive sense, before an important match – an action that is frowned upon for fear it could pressure the man in the middle.


Obama tries to ensure sympathetic media coverage only

We read:
"The White House Press Office has refused to give the Boston Herald full access to President Obama’s Boston fund-raiser today, in e-mails objecting to the newspaper’s front page placement of a Mitt Romney op-ed, saying pool reporters are chosen based on whether they cover the news “fairly.”

“I tend to consider the degree to which papers have demonstrated to covering the White House regularly and fairly in determining local pool reporters,” White House spokesman Matt Lehrich wrote in response to a Herald request for full access to the presidential visit.

“My point about the op-ed was not that you ran it but that it was the full front page, which excluded any coverage of the visit of a sitting US President to Boston. I think that raises a fair question about whether the paper is unbiased in its coverage of the President’s visits,”

Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom defended Romney’s March 8 opinion piece: “That op-ed was about jobs, which apparently is a sensitive subject for the thin-skinned people around the president.


20 May, 2011

Homosexuals MUST support homosexual marriage

We read:
"The protests started as soon as Rhode Island House Speaker Gordon Fox sounded the death knell for gay marriage legislation and said he'd back civil unions instead. A cop-out, gay marriage supporters said. A compromise for no one. One man made a sign proclaiming, "Fox Hunting Season is Open."

For the first openly gay House speaker in the nation, the protests were personal. But Fox, who sold ice cream to pay his way through law school and who cites Winston Churchill as a role model, knows something about persevering. About taking the long view. And about counting votes.

He explains his decision on the vote as a calculated move designed to get gay couples real rights today. While he may have had the votes to get the measure through the House, the measure faced a battle in the Senate, where Senate President Teresa Paiva Weed opposed gay marriage but has indicated support for civil unions.

The measure would allow gay couples to enter into civil unions that grant all of the state rights and benefits given to married couples in Rhode Island. The full House could vote on the measure as early as Thursday.

Fox lives with his mother just a few miles from where he grew up. He's been in a committed relationship for years. He's known as a fast-talking, skillful debater and crafty politician.


Kids not allowed to hate their teachers any more

The Left really get their claws into the young:
"A 13-year-old New Hampshire girl has been suspended after she wrote on her Facebook page that she hoped Osama bin Laden had killed her math teacher. And while the girl’s mother agrees the post was inappropriate, she says her daughter’s free speech has been infringed:

Kimberly Dell’isola said her daughter was suspended for five days after saying she wished Osama bin Laden killed her math teacher. While she agrees the post was offensive, Dell‘isola said her daughter’s free speech should be protected.”In hindsight, she’s mortified that she said that, but she’s a 13-year-old kid,” Dell’isola said.

She said she agrees with the administrators at Rundlett Middle School that the post was wrong, but thinks the punishment is too harsh.”You are denying her an education based on something she did at home. That’s my business, not your business,” Dell’isola said.


19 May, 2011

Fraternity heavily penalized for incorrect chant

This is just a feminist over-reaction against a bit of youthful jocularity. They did NOT "threaten" anybody. They just did a chant as part of an initiation ritual. Their full chant was "No means Yes; Yes means anal", which is just a bit of bravado.

I have never taken part in such activities myself but have been present when other young men did and the same young men were perfectly courteous to women on other occasions
"A Yale fraternity whose alumni include both President Bushes has been banned from conducting any activities on campus for five years, including recruiting, as punishment for an episode last October in which members led pledges in chants offensive to women, the university announced on Tuesday.

“After a full hearing, the committee found that the D.K.E. chapter, as an organization, one comprised of Yale students, had threatened and intimidated others, in violation of the Undergraduate Regulations of Yale College as they pertain to ‘harassment, coercion or intimidation’ and ‘imperiling the integrity and values of the university community,’ ” Dr. Miller wrote.

The fact that the Bushes were in the fraternity probably had a lot to do with the severity of the crackdown

NJ: ACLU threatens high school over graduation site

We read:
"A New Jersey high school with a 70-year tradition of hosting graduation ceremonies in a historic auditorium is standing firm against legal threats from the American Civil Liberties Union, which claims the event violates the separation of church and state because of the Christian-owned site's religious displays.

For generations, graduates of Neptune High School have walked down the aisle of the Great Auditorium in Ocean Grove, where the impressive 6,500-seat venue dominates the landscape of one of the area’s most historic beach towns."

The ACLU really are extremists. They will not be happy until there is no mention of Christianity anywhere in the land.

18 May, 2011

Newt has got the panties of the NYT in a twist

Following are a few excerpts from an editorial in the NYT headed: "Mr. Gingrich’s Intolerant History". I myself think that Newt is a has-been and an irrelevance to today's politics but I am struck by the NYT's failure to offer any argument against what Newt has said. All they offer is condemnation and abuse. That's typical of Leftism of course but it's sort of saddening that even the NYT cannot rise above that level. They have their ears so closed to any challenge that they think it is just obvious that they are right and Newt is wrong.

Newt certainly defends his viewpoints vigorously and at length so why don't they quote more than a few words from him and show where his arguments are wrong? They can't. They just need to have their little orgasm of abuse. Hate speech towards Newt Gingrich? You betcha!
Donald Trump is an amateur compared with Mr. Gingrich at sliming the Obama administration — as well as Democrats, Muslims, blacks and gay men and lesbians.

The Democrats who won in 2008, including President Obama, are “left-wing radicals” who lead a “secular socialist machine,” he wrote in his 2010 book, “To Save America.”

He accused them of producing “the greatest political corruption ever seen in modern America.” And then the inevitable historical coup de grâce: “The secular-socialist machine represents as great a threat to America as Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union once did.”

The slurs don’t stop there. He compared the Muslims who wanted to open an Islamic center in Lower Manhattan to the German Reich, saying it “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust Museum.”

This nuanced grasp of world affairs was reinforced when he said that Mr. Obama displayed “Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior.”


SCOTUS declines “so help me God” suit

We read:
"The US Supreme Court on Monday refused to take up an atheist challenge to the use of the phrase, 'so help me God,' at the conclusion of the presidential oath of office during a president-elect’s inauguration.

The lawsuit initially asked a federal judge to block Chief Justice John Roberts from reciting 'so help me God' while administering the oath in January 2009 to President-elect Obama. It also sought an order preventing two members of the clergy from conducting an invocation and benediction during the 2009 inauguration.

A federal judge threw the suit out, ruling that the atheists lacked the necessary legal standing to bring the litigation."

The atheist guy behind these lawsuits seems a bit of a sad-sack.

Just the usual Leftist hunger to be noticed, I guess.

17 May, 2011

A law professor who would fail Logic 101

He has all sorts of qualifications and honors to his name but you would never know it from what he writes below
"Organised religion’s role in and responsibility for hate crimes ensues as a direct result of its dogmatic teachings according to which homosexuality is an abomination. In 1986, the Catholic Church, on the basis of the above belief, officially opposed extending civil rights protection to homosexual people.

It does not take the intellect of a rocket scientist to see that the flipside of the coin amounted to the condonation of anti-gay violence. [What nonsense! There is no such flipside. This is just an assertion. When you deny someone a right, it doesn't mean you are going to attack them]

In fact the Church itself endorsed this reading: ”When civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase” [That was not condoning anything. It was just a prediction. It in fact called violence irrational!]

No one can deny that, with very few exceptions, religion condemns homosexuality. When one condemns a practice as wrong, the logical implication is that the practice stands in need of punishment and correction. [That's another arguable point, but even if we accept that assertion, the question remains: "Who is going to do the punishing?" Romans Chapter 1 makes it clear that God will do the punishing, not man]

The guy is a South African and, sadly, he helps make Van der Merwe jokes plausible. Van der Merwe is the stereotypal dumb Boer.

More shallow thinking: Rand Paul under fire for equating the right to health care with slavery

We read:
"Sen. Rand Paul has come under fire from African American leaders for saying that people who believe in the right to health care also believe in enslaving health care workers.

“With regard to the idea of whether or not you have a right to health care, you have to realize what that implies,” Paul, a Bowling Green, Ky., ophthalmologist, said at a Senate hearing Wednesday on community health care centers. “It’s not an abstraction. I’m a physician. That means you have a right to come to my house and conscript me.” “It means you believe in slavery,” he said.

State Sen. Gerald Neal, D-Louisville, said Paul was “making a good argument for himself, to qualify himself as a racist,” though he added, “I’m not quite there yet. I just say he’s an irresponsible, ignorant individual.”

Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., and a member of the black caucus, said the Kentucky senator should apologize to the nation for his insensitive remarks, which he said were an attack on President Barack Obama’s health care reform law.

What we see above is an emotional response to a perfectly logical argument. Rand Paul was not saying that Obama or anyone else WILL conscript him or enslave him. He was simply criticizing the logic behind the statement that health care is a "right". There is a video at the link if that is not clear.

If I have a "right" to some service and nobody qualified wants to provide that service, what happens then? Either it would be discovered that I have no such right or the government would have to force some other person to provide that service -- which could very rapidly degenerate into something akin to slavery for that other person. Only slaves can be forced to provide services.

But logic is lost on Leftists. Healthcare is a service, not a right.

16 May, 2011

Mass. Teacher Told 11-Year-Old Drawing Of American Flag Would “Offend” Other Students

We read:
"A civil rights controversy is brewing at an elementary school in the Town of Orange, and it all surrounds an11 year-old’s drawing of the American Flag.

The family of Frankie Girard is claiming that their son’s civil rights were violated after a teacher allegedly told him that hanging his picture of the American flag would offend another student.

The Butterfield Elementary School is at the center of controversy for the incident on Monday. According to Frankie Girard’s father, John, the boy was in art class drawing a picture.

“He was denied hanging the flag up. And, he asked if he could just even hang it on his desk, and he was told no. He could take the picture that he drew and take it home and be proud of it there,” Girard said.

According to his father, the teacher told Frankie that his drawing of the American Flag would offend one of his classmates. “We’re allowing him to display his civil rights and be proud of who he is, but we’re denying Franklin those same rights,” Girard said.

The superintendent told 22News that Frankie’s father is “going to extremes” and that the school has always respected the American Flag.

The school is backpedalling now, of course. Publicity tends to have that effect.

The J. Crew advertisement controversy

We read:
"For those who have not already seen it, the ad features Jenna Lyons, a designer for the preppy clothing company posing with her 5-year-old son Beckett. I almost missed it the first time, but if you look carefully you can see that Beckett's toenails are painted pink. Underneath the photo reads the caption, "Lucky for me, I ended up with a boy whose favorite color is pink. Toenail painting is way more fun in neon."

The image has outraged some social conservatives who claim that this kind of behavior torments children and confuses them about their sexual identity. Erica Brown, a writer for the conservative Media Research Center Network, wrote that the ads such as J. Crew "features blatant propaganda celebrating transgendered children."

I think it's just propaganda too. I can't imagine a little boy painting his toenails pink. Little boys are the ultimate "sexists": They despise girls or anything girly.

The writer excerpted above is a psychologist who goes on to imply that it is perfectly normal for boys to play with dolls and girls to play with toy trucks (etc.). He must have stranger kids than any I have ever met. More likely he has not been involved in bringing up kids at all. I'm a psychologist too but I don't need research to tell me what just about any parent knows.

15 May, 2011

Unprecedented: Obama admin. claims right to censor ‘unclassified’ materials

As part of a court case aiming to penalize a whistleblower. Their case against him is so thin that exposing all the relevant information would probably cause the case to collapse
In the case of former National Security Agency (NSA) executive Thomas A. Drake -- indicted last April and accused of funneling documents to an unnamed reporter at an unnamed newspaper, for stories that have not been identified -- the president's lawyers have made a unique and potentially unprecedented claim.

With less than a month before Drake's trial begins, the Obama administration has filed a memo with the court claiming the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) gives judges the right to censor and withhold material that is "unclassified."

The argument effectively hinges on earlier court cases which interpreted CIPA as less of a rulebook for judges and more of an advisory. The president's lawyers took that a bit further, suggesting it actually just "provides the tools" needed for the judiciary to decide what information should be protected from the prying eyes of defense attorneys. They also claim the National Security Agency Act of 1959 (NSAA) allows courts to redact any and all information pertaining to the NSA's activities.

In a document filed the following day (PDF), Drake's representation reacted with horror. "There is no authority for this unprecedented assertion in the context of a criminal case," they wrote.

"The National Security Agency Act of 1959 is a civil statute that does not address criminal prosecutions or the rights of a criminal defendant. The applicable statute is the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA). CIPA is the only statute that confers upon courts the authority to admit substitutions for relevant evidence in criminal cases. CIPA authorizes substitutions only for 'classified information,' not unclassified information."


No free speech for Jews at UCI

Excerpt from a report by law professor Alan M. Dershowitz:
"Should students who conspire to "shut down" an invited speaker with whom they disagree be prosecuted for the misdemeanor of conspiracy to disturb a meeting? That is the question roiling the University of California.

The facts are not really in dispute. Israel's Ambassador to the United States—a moderate academic named Michael Oren—was invited to present a talk at the University of California at Irvine, a hotbed of radical Islamic hate speech against Israel.

The Muslim Student Union organized an effort, in the words of one of its leaders, to "shut down" Oren's speech—that is to prevent Oren from expressing his views and to stop the audience who came to hear him from listening to them.

Ultimately, that effort failed and Oren managed to deliver his speech, after many long and sustained disruptions, but if the Muslim Student Union had gotten its way, Oren would have been shut down completely.

The University, which is a state institution, had a constitutional obligation to protect the First Amendment rights of Oren's audience to hear what he had to say, and the state prosecutor has a legal obligation to deter future conspiracies to censor controversial speakers, by criminally prosecuting those students who conspired to deny other students their First Amendment rights.

It is shocking therefore to see who has lined up behind the students who set out to censor Ambassador Oren. Two prominent leaders of the American Civil Liberties have joined with radical Muslims and other extremists in an effort to pressure the local District Attorney to drop misdemeanor charges against 11 student censors.

Ultimately a jury will decide whether the students conspired to "shut down" Oren's talk, or whether they were merely "protesting" the content of his talk. The evidence will clearly show a conspiracy to stop Oren from speaking.

Why then have the ACLU leaders distorted the facts and conveyed a totally misleading impression of what took place at the University of California? The answer seems clear. These leaders don't like Israel and they support the censorship of pro-Israel views. They would never take the same position if the shoe had been on the other foot: If the speaker were from Hamas and the students trying to shut him down were pro-Israel.


14 May, 2011

Censorship of Gun Ads

We read:
"Today, the Goldwater Institute filed a legal challenge to the removal of a business advertisement from 50 Phoenix bus shelters in October 2010, claiming the city’s rules are so vague that they allow city officials to violate business owners’ right to free speech.

The Phoenix Public Transit Department says posters for a website operated by TrainMeAz did not comply with city standards for advertising at bus shelters. But city officials cannot explain how the TrainMeAZ ads are substantially different than posters that appear on bus stops throughout the city for other businesses including jewelry stores, fast-food restaurants, and weekend gun shows, said Clint Bolick, the Goldwater Institute’s litigation director.

“Phoenix’s officials can oversee the content of advertising on city property to prevent obscene material or truly inappropriate messages,” Mr. Bolick said. “But the city cannot dismiss ads based on a bureaucratic whim."


Florida Man in Push to Get Confederate License Plate Approved

We read:
"Adams runs the Sons of Confederate Veterans in Florida. What he wants to express on his license plate is his affinity with the Confederacy. A few years ago he designed a plate that reads “Confederate Heritage,” with a rebel flag in the center.

It’s a similar design currently on license plates in nine other states, including Alabama, Georgia, Maryland, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.

But Florida requires the approval of the state legislature for all license plates and has repeatedly rejected the so-called “rebel plate.”

All in all, Florida issues more than 120 specialty plates, which Adams says makes license plates free speech. On March 30, he got a federal judge to agree, declaring the license approval process unconstitutional. The judge said the process unfairly gives the state legislature “unfettered discretion to engage in viewpoint discrimination.”

Thompson and other members of the state’s black legislative caucus are vowing to fight the plate if and when Adams finds a sponsor.

Thompson says the judge’s ruling does not force the legislature to put every proposed symbol on a license plate. “It only says we have to make the process fair and equal,” she said.

Adams says he is prepared to sue again if the legislature denies his plate.


13 May, 2011

Wisconsin: Another "racist" mascot

We read:
"Controversy is beginning to brew over a proposal to change the Menomonie School District’s mascot. The school board said it is taking action before someone files a complaint against the mascot, which some say is racist.

Now the district is facing a law that went into effect in May, 2010. The law says if someone complains that a school’s mascot is racially insensitive, the district must determine if the mascot promotes discrimination, student harassment or stereotyping.

If the mascot is deemed racially insensitive, it must immediately be pulled from school activities.

I would have thought it was HONORING Indians

European court blocks restrictions on media

A small win for freedom of the press
"Max Mosley yesterday lost a court bid to force journalists to contact people before publishing potentially embarrassing details of their private lives, a case prompted when a News Corp. newspaper reported he’d taken part in a Nazi-themed sex party without calling him beforehand.

The record award the High Court in London granted the former Formula One president for breach of his privacy was 'an adequate remedy’ that averted the 'chilling effect’ a prior-notification requirement could have on the media, the European Court of Human Rights ruled yesterday."


12 May, 2011

California DOT Rejects Veterans Memorial Over American Flag

California Transportation Department says memorial is an ‘impermissible act of public expression’

Blackface bad; Whiteface good?

We read:
"An intriguing yet peculiar occurrence that has manifested in African American popular culture over the last two decades is the performance of whiteface or black actors portraying white characters. Often “dressed” in chalky white makeup and blue contact lenses, these caricatures of white folks often trouble or legitimize whiteness for a non-white audience.

On the surface, whiteface performers often exaggerate widely recognized and aesthetically pleasing aspects of white people and culture from a minority viewpoint – light eyes, light colored hair, swanky clothes, snobbish attitude. The ultimate aim, however, is to present the audience with how an Othered body subverts whiteness as normalized discourse.

The above is of course written in nearly impenetrable "postmodernist" jargon but, with a great effort, I gather that blacks don whiteface makeup for the purpose of mocking whites. And that is just great, apparently.

But if the old blackface minstrel shows (which were intended to CELEBRATE Africans as entertainers as far as I can see) were "racist", then surely whiteface is racist too. I guess I am missing something.

11 May, 2011

US Military Is at War With Indigenous People: Not Just Geronimo, Tomahawk Missiles, Apache Helicopters — Using Any Native American Term Is Racist; Indian Activist Demands Apology

Denmark: Free Speech is for Muslim Hate Groups, Not Their Critics

We read:
"The heroic Lars Hedegaard has vowed to appeal his recent criminal conviction in Denmark. As I’ve noted, Hedegaard’s alleged crime was discussing Muslim male family violence towards Muslim women and children. In short, truth-telling and free speech have now been criminalized in Denmark. According to Hedegaard: "My crime is to have called attention to the horrific conditions of Muslim women and for my audacity the court has now enabled my detractors to label me a racist."

Muslims can say whatever they want with impunity. Just a few weeks ago Denmark opened its gates to the hate-spewing group Hizb ut-Tahrir, known for his advocacy of wife-beating and the killing of homosexuals. He was provided a platform in Copenhagen and nobody thought of dragging him into court.

What can one say, what must one say? How can one tell the truth without running afoul of the politically correct policing codes which penalize do-gooders and truth-tellers but allow evil-doers to run free?


10 May, 2011

Super sensitivity to monkey allusions about Obama

Obama was NOT depicted as a monkey in the above cartoon but some saw the cartoon as a reference to a monkey -- so just that inference provoked a furore. It's true that Obama's features are distorted in the cartoon but that is what cartoons do.
"The editor of the University of New Mexico's student paper has apologized for a cartoon printed in the publication's Wednesday issue that was deemed racially insensitive by some students.

The cartoon, which was given the green light by Daily Lobo Editor Chris Quintana, depicted President Barack Obama holding Osama bin Laden's head in triumph, modeled after the classic scene from the Lion King in which Rafiki, a monkey, held baby Simba above his head.

The Daily Lobo itself reported that 30 students gathered on campus Wednesday to protest the depiction of Obama as a monkey

Explicity depicting George Bush as a monkey is fine however

I think cartoons are generally accepted as protected free speech but there is no free speech at American universities, of course

Hindus learning from Muslims

"UPSET Hindus have welcomed apology from an Australian swimwear label over the depiction of image of Goddess Lakshmi on swimwear at Rosemount Australian Fashion Week in Sydney last week.

Indian activists of the right-wing Hindu organisation Shiv Sena held photocopies of models wearing swimwear featuring Lakshmi as they burned an Australian flag during a demonstration in Amritsar.

A statement attributed to Lisa Blue Swimwear, headquartered in Byron Bay said: "We would like to offer an apology to anyone we may have offended and advise that the image of Goddess Lakshmi will not appear on any piece of Lisa Blue swimwear for the new season, with a halt put on all production of the new range and pieces shown on the runway from last week removed.

In a statement, Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, said the apology was “a step in the right direction”. He said inappropriate usage of Hindu deities or concepts for commercial or other agendas was offensive to devotees. Symbols of any faith should not be mishandled, he added.

Maybe it's time for Christians to get on the bandwagon and do a bit of shouting, fist waving and flag burning etc. Christians in both Britain and America certainly get a lot of hate poured out at them by atheists and the Left.

9 May, 2011

Tweets to be regulated in Britain

Only tweets by journalists so far but regulations tend to grow
"UK journalist and newspaper Twitter feeds are set to be brought under the regulation of the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) later this year, the first time that it has sought to bring social media messages under its remit, according to British news reports today.

The PCC believes that tweets can in effect be part of a "newspaper's editorial product", writings that its code of practice would otherwise cover if the same text appeared in print or on a newspaper website, The (London) Times reported.

A change in the code would circumvent a loophole that, in theory, means that there is no means of redress via the PCC if somebody wanted to complain about an alleged inaccuracy in a statement that was tweeted. Last year the PCC found that it was unable to rule in a complaint made against tweets published by the Brighton Argus.


Fired for Christian beliefs

We read:
"A weatherman in California claims he was fired from an ABC affiliate after he objected to the station airing a story on successful local strip clubs. But he’s not just any weatherman — he‘s the station’s chief meteorologist.

Jack Church says he was fired from the Bakersfield, CA news station after he voiced his concerns about the story that featured how local strip joints were doing well despite the down economy


8 May, 2011

Christians not welcome in NY school

The "tolerant" Left at work again:
"A federal lawsuit has been filed on behalf of a group of Christian high school students in New York who said their principal banned them from starting a Christian club.

“The principal said, ‘I don’t want any of these Christian clubs at my school,’” said David Cortman, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative advocacy legal group. The ADF filed the lawsuit Monday against the Hicksville Union Free School District in Central Islip, NY.

“Public schools cannot ban Christian student clubs simply because they are religious,” Cortman said. “If officials at government-run schools did their homework, they’d know that students have a constitutionally protected right to express their beliefs.”


A prominent Leftist insists on his right to be abusive

Paul Keating is a former Leftist Prime Minister of Australia. He has always been much prone to scurrilous invective against anybody he disagrees with and that unpleasant trait appears to have been a large part of the reason why he was voted out of office after only one term. He seems to have learnt nothing from that, however. He has just resigned from a government job after he was told to stop abusing a Greenie
"Paul Keating has resigned as the chair of the Barangaroo Design Excellence Review Panel after a letter from Planning Minister Brad Hazzard told him to stop calling Clover Moore a "muesli chewer".

Mr Hazzard appeared to threaten Mr Keating's future in the job after writing him a letter yesterday. But last night Mr Keating sent his own letter back to Mr Hazzard saying that he was quitting.

In a letter to Mr Keating, released to The Daily Telegraph last night, Mr Hazzard said: "I specifically refer to the use of the words 'sandal-wearing, muesli-chewing, bike-riding pedestrians. I ask you to confirm to me that you will desist from any denigrating comments ... ".

Mr Keating replied that Ms Moore wanted to "vandalise" a proposed Headland Park by letting two cruise terminals be based there and he had a right to make remarks criticising her.

"The effect of your requirement that I desist from making relevant comments about the project would effectively muzzle me. Let me tell you, I am not going to be muzzled," he said. "Therefore, my continued chairmanship would be at odds with your Government's requirements, that I remain a mute figure."

Note that it was a new conservative State government that told Keating to tone it down. The previous Leftist government saw no problem with his abuse.

7 May, 2011

TN: ACLU claims schools endorsed Christianity

We read:
"A complaint made by American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee on behalf of three Sumner County families accuses the Sumner County Board of Education of promoting Christianity and violating the U.S. Constitution. ...

The complaint alleges several examples of the school system promoting Christianity, including the distribution of Bibles in at least two schools; a teacher who displayed a cross on a classroom wall; sectarian prayers over the loudspeaker and at school events; and graduation ceremonies for three high schools at Long Hollow Baptist Church."

The complaint seeks an injunction to stop the religious activities. It is not a lawsuit at this point, Southerland said on Monday.

The complaint further alleges members of a Bible study club at Madison Creek Elementary were on a daily basis “permitted to pray over the loudspeaker for all school children to hear.”

Hood, who has worked at Madison Creek the past seven years as a classroom teacher and assistant principal, said the allegations are untrue. “We observe a moment of silence over the intercom in the mornings before school,” Hood said.

The complaint alleges students at Indian Lake Elementary were instructed to line up outside their classroom and pick up a Bible from a table if they wanted one. The children were instructed by their teacher to write their names in it, according to the complaint.

In an interview on April 22, Director of Schools Benny Bills defended holding commencement ceremonies at Long Hollow Baptist, saying the church is ideal because of its space and location and that it doesn’t charge fees.

Mostly exaggeration and nitpicking by the sound of it.

Mozilla defies DHS, will not remove Mafiaa Fire add-on

Good to hear. A useful blow against censorship. I might have to use it myself one day if Google get shirty with this blog
"The open-source Mozilla project said Thursday it won't comply with a U.S. Department of Homeland Security request to remove a Firefox add-on that helps redirect Web traffic for sites that have been seized by the government.

At issue is the Mafiaa Fire add-on, designed to reduce the effectiveness of an antipiracy campaign by DHS's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division. When users try to visit a website whose Internet domain has been seized by ICE, Mafiaa Fire redirects them to a working site set up to replace the seized domain."


6 May, 2011

American Indians decry “Geronimo” code name for bin Laden

I suppose this is rather trivial but I certainly would not want the name of any of my ancestors used to stand for bin Laden.
"He died 102 years ago in Oklahoma, a beaten warrior, a prisoner of war, an exile from his homeland, a propped-up sideshow, a gambler and a lukewarm Christian. His family was murdered by Mexicans. The Americans stripped him of most everything else.

And yet, the Apache born near the Gila River in present-day Arizona with the not-very-impressive name of Goyahkla ('One Who Yawns') rode into history as the legendary Geronimo.

It was his name that the U.S. military chose as the code for the raid, and perhaps for Osama bin Laden himself, during the operation that killed the al-Qaida leader in Pakistan.

In a triumphant moment for the United States, the moniker has left a sour taste among many Native Americans.


Big fines if British public builidngs fail to mark Europe Day?

Some flag burners I can understand above. They look pretty happy about it too. Note that they are standing opposite the Palace of Westminster (The British Houses of Parliament)
"Eurocrats last night faced an angry revolt over attempts to force Britain to celebrate the EU’s Europe Day next week.

Scores of public buildings around the country are being ordered to fly the blue-and-gold European Union flag to mark the occasion next Monday.

Officials will be expected to ensure the flag remains hoisted for a week, with a swingeing fine from Brussels threatened for those that disobey.

Astonishingly, they even have to take a photograph of the flag flying and email it to the European Commission to ensure the regulations are being observed.

Last night Tory Cabinet Minister Eric Pickles savaged Brussels bureaucrats for ordering his Whitehall office to fly the EU flag.


5 May, 2011

TX: Must not suggest that bin Laden was a Muslim hero

The fact that there was dancing in the streets in Muslim coumntries after 9/11 must not be mentioned either, presumably
"A Clear Creek ISD teacher has been placed on administrative leave after being accused of making insensitive comments to a Muslim student about the death of Osama bin Laden.

The Clear Brook High School teacher is accused of profiling a student in his ninth-grade algebra class Monday by telling the girl, "I bet that you're grieving."

It does seem hard on the girl but would he have made that remark if she had not previously expressed Jihadi sympathies?

"Progressive" Australian bishop says African priests no good

That would be "racist" in anybody else's mouth
"The bishop who has run foul of the Vatican has raised questions about integrating increasing numbers of overseas-born priests being used to plug gaps in Queensland communities.

Hundreds of people attended two separate vigils for Toowoomba Bishop William Morris in the Darling Downs centre last night, following his shock dumping by the Catholic Church this week.

The dismissal has created international headlines, with media making particular reference to the stern wording of a letter on the Vatican website stating it was determined by "Pope Benedict that the diocese would be better served by the leadership of a new bishop". Bishop Morris was ousted over a 2006 letter in which he raised the issue of married men or women joining the priesthood in an attempt to address the dwindling stock.

Instead priests have been brought in from overseas, which Bishop Morris says has been ill-considered. "It's not easy for a person coming out of an African culture into a western culture - they're mono-cultures, especially in western Queensland," he said.

"It's crazy, it's totally foreign for them, and a dozen people turn up whereas my experience in Africa has been that a thousand people turn up. Also the ministry in these areas is a relationship ministry, it's not service, but it's a relationship and you need to be that relationship, you need to become part of the community."


4 May, 2011

MI: Quran-burning pastor defies hostile mob

We read:
"A controversial Florida pastor banned last week from protesting at a Detroit-area mosque on Friday cut short a demonstration at a city hall largely drowned out by counter-protesters.

Terry Jones, 59, had vowed to return this week, saying that his ban on demonstrating in front of the landmark Islamic Center of America in heavily muslim Dearborn had violated free speech protections of the Constitution. 'We are here today to speak out on issues that pertain to all American citizens,' Jones said, using a wireless microphone at a podium set up at the top of the city hall steps."

Separate barricaded zones were created for Jones' protest on the steps of city hall and for counter-protesters across Michigan Avenue, a busy four-lane street. Jones' 75 supporters were outnumbered by about five-to-one.

Police were a visible presence on both sides of the street and on two rooftops across the street from city hall.

Good to hear that the police took big precautions to protect him this time. Quite a change from last time.

TN: Defamation suits could chill speech in elections

Though they are not likely to succeed:
"Community leaders and lawyers say lawsuits tied to recent political campaigns could chill speech in future Tennessee elections.

A First Amendment expert, however, says such lawsuits are hard to win because the U.S. Supreme Court has created a precedent of protecting political speech.

Lawsuits related to Metro government’s only successful recall election in its history and the contentious 6th Congressional District Republican primary last year are still in the courts.

While they may have seemed like political sideshows during busy election cycles, experts say the consequences could be long term for candidates and campaigns in Tennessee."

Even defamation suits that lose can be pernicious if the person sued does not have much money to defend the charges. The old common-law rule that the loser pays all the legal costs of both parties would help stop frivolous lawsuits -- but that rule seems often not to be followed in the USA.

3 May, 2011

Must not like your wife's bottom?

I think most men like the sight of a nicely filled out female bottom. Men tend to have skinny bottoms. And if men DID'T like the way females look, the human race would probably by now be extinct. And the British papers were full of admiring comments about the bottom of Pippa Middleton at the recent Royal wedding.

But I guess the Australian TV journalist below was a little unwise in his choice of vocabulary: "arse" is the British/Australian version of the American "ass". In Australia, we don't confuse posteriors with donkeys.
The severely jetlagged Today host, who raced back from covering the royal wedding to be at the awards show in Melbourne, angered viewers and women in the room with his risque acceptance speech.

Thanking his wife Cas, he said: "She has been a great influence on my life and has also got the best arse I have ever seen."

LOL! I suspect that "severely jetlagged" is another version of "tired and emotional" (drunk)

A grunt from Canada about the monarchy

We read:
"I contend that the monarchy must go because it embodies values that are anathema to Canadian ideals of gender equity, religious tolerance and racial equality.

Succession of the monarchy is governed by male-preference cognatic primogeniture, under which sons inherit before daughters. How can Canada, which has such built-in bias favouring males over females as our head of state, be taken seriously on the issue of gender equality?

This blatant discrimination—which it seems to me is contrary to the spirit, at least, of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms—probably passes unnoticed because Queen Elizabeth II has reigned for almost 60 years, a lifetime for many Canadians. But for how much longer will Canadians stand for its basic lack of fairness?

And regarding the Charter, does it not prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion? Yet our monarch cannot be a Roman Catholic.

The monarchy long preceded Canada itself and works very well as it is. Will Canada's carping anti-discrimination laws ever evoke the vast pride and happiness shown by the British public on great Royal occasions? And the monarchy is also very popular in Canada itself

There was in fact quite recently a proposal in Britain to change the law to scrap male primogeniture and the prohibition of Catholics from the throne but it had no real support and was quickly dropped when the Archbishop of Canterbury said it would pose "difficulties".

2 May, 2011

Man Arrested Outside Calif. DMV for Reading His Bible Out Loud

DMVs have inspired a lot worse than Bible readings at times. The reading might have helped calm a few frustrations
When Mark Mackey, a member of the local Calvary Chapel, showed up to the DMV office in Hemet, CA on February 2, he had a goal: read the Bible and introduce those waiting in line to the “gospel of Jesus Christ.” And for about 15 minutes he was successful.

That is until a California Highway Patrolman took the Bible from his hands, arrested him, and told him he was guilty of preaching to a “captive audience.”

According to reports, Mackey wasn’t the only one arrested. Pastor Brett Coronado and Edmond Flores, Jr., who were accompanying him, were also taken into custody.

A press release from the group Advocates for Faith and Freedom, which is representing the men in a lawsuit, says the men were arrested for “impeding an open business” under Penal Code Section 602.1(b). But, the group calls the justification under that statue a stretch.

“The charge of ‘impeding an open business’ was enacted in large part to protect businesses against protestors who block the doors of an open business,” the release says. “At the time of the arrest of these men, the DMV was closed, and they were standing at least fifty feet away from the entrance.”

“This is an abuse of power on the part of the CHP,” said Jennifer Monk, associate general counsel for Advocates for Faith and Freedom. “The arresting officer could find no appropriate penal code to use when arresting these men. The purpose of the arrests appears to have been to censor them.”

Despite the arrests, the district attorney has not pursued criminal charges. Still, Advocates for Faith and Freedom is going through with its lawsuit.

“Whether this was an intentional violation of our clients’ constitutional liberty or whether this was an act of ignorance on the part of the CHP, this lawsuit is important in order to preserve the liberty to read the Bible aloud on public property without fear of criminal prosecution,” said Robert Tyler, General Counsel for Advocates for Faith & Freedom.

Both parts of the First Amendment would seem to protect what the preacher did. Someone should do a Koran reading there and see what the CHP does.

Black girls attack a guy who went into the women's restroom

I think most women would be upset to find a man in their restroom but these black girls sprang into action. And they sure were vicious.

The interesting thing here, though is that the video was taken down by YouTube as a violation of its "hate speech" policy. I wouldn't have thought that speech was the issue. Would an attack on blacks by whites be taken down? I doubt it. I think it was taken down so that people would not see that that the assailants were black
Last Friday, 22-year-old Chrissy Lee Polis, a transgendered woman (male-to-female) was brutally attacked in a Baltimore-area McDonald’s after coming out of the women’s restroom.

Her assailants, two 14- and 18-year-old girls, took turns kicking, punching, and tearing at Polis’ hair and skin for over 15 minutes. Flustered and satisfied, they ran out the front door. Both were charged with assault in the first degree.

Worse yet, a McDonald’s employee recorded the incident and uploaded the video to Youtube which immediately went viral before being taken down as a violation of Youtube’s policy prohibiting hate speech.

Video at link. I think oddballs should go into the restroom that suits their genitals. They are asking for trouble if they do otherwise and this time one of them got it.

1 May, 2011

Obama still supporting black racism

We read:
"On Easter, Mr. Obama and his family attended Shiloh Baptist Church in Washington. The liberal press corps made much of the fact that the church was founded in 1863 by freed slaves. Yet the church’s pastor, the Rev. Wallace Charles Smith, is a race-baiting black nationalist. He is a more polished version of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a longtime pastor of Mr. Obama’s.

Mr. Smith lacks the bombast of Mr. Wright but peddles the same philosophy of racialism, grievance-mongering and black victimology. In one of his recent sermons, Mr. Smith argued that institutionalized racism continues. “Anytime a swimming club can deny membership to students simply because they are African-American or Hispanic is an indication that Barack’s presidency does not solve the question of justice in this nation,” he said.

Really? Where and at what institutions are blacks and Hispanics denied access to swimming pools? This is a figment of Mr. Smith’s imagination.

He further stressed that segregation was not really eradicated; rather, it has simply morphed into a more subtle system of racial oppression through conservative talk radio and widespread opposition to affirmative action.

“Now Jim Crow wears blue pinstripes and goes to law school and carries fancy briefs and cases,” Mr. Smith said. “And he doesn’t have to wear white robes anymore because now he can wear the protective cover of talk radio or can get a regular news program on Fox.”

He even compared Rush Limbaugh to the Ku Klux Klan and the White Citizens’ Council. In other words, conservatives - Mr. Obama’s critics - are incorrigibly racist and seek to perpetuate a watered-down form of apartheid. For Mr. Smith and many others on the left, disagreeing with racial quotas is not only wrong, but evil - a manifestation of deep-seated intolerance and bigotry.

The opposite is true: Conservatives are the true heirs of the civil rights movement. They believe in a colorblind society and equality under the law.


Trump a racist?

We read:
"The liberal media has apparently now decided that Donald Trump is a racist. Bob Schieffer of CBS News accused Donald Trump of racial malice for calling for the release of President Obama's collegiate grades.

Yet calling Trump a racial provocateur is a sure sign of intellectual laziness and descends the depths of disingenuousness. Trump has been a prominent public figure for decades. If he bore racial animus it would showed itself long ago. As misguided as Trump was to focus his attention on Obama's birth certificate, liberals are making the mistake of assuming that his criticism of President Obama is motivated solely by race.

With this in mind, how exactly is it "the politics of paranoia and intolerance" to ask President Obama to release his academic records? George W. Bush, Al Gore and John Kerry released their academic records. Why is it then unreasonable to demand the same of our current President?

Now there's no doubt that Trump is baiting Obama. But he isn't race-baiting. Trump isn't going after Obama because of the color of his skin but because of its thinness.

After all, Trump now has Obama on the defensive. At this point, Trump would be a fool if he didn't demand that President Obama release his academic records.

Donald Trump can be called many things. A racist isn't one of them.

Note the complete divorce from reality among Leftists. The black preacher in the top post today is obsessed with race and full of racial hate. By contrast Trump has said nothing about race. Yet somehow it is Trump who is the racist.

Posts from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).

"HATE SPEECH" is free speech: The U.S. Supreme Court stated the general rule regarding protected speech in Texas v. Johnson (109 S.Ct. at 2544), when it held: "The government may not prohibit the verbal or nonverbal expression of an idea merely because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable." Federal courts have consistently followed this. Said Virginia federal district judge Claude Hilton: "The First Amendment does not recognize exceptions for bigotry, racism, and religious intolerance or ideas or matters some may deem trivial, vulgar or profane."

Even some advocacy of violence is protected by the 1st Amendment. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously that speech advocating violent illegal actions to bring about social change is protected by the First Amendment "except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action."

The traditional advice about derogatory speech: "Sticks and stones will break your bones but names will never hurt you". Apparently people today are not as emotionally robust as their ancestors were.

A phobia is an irrational fear, so the terms "Islamophobic" and "homophobic" embody a claim that the people so described are mentally ill. There is no evidence for either claim. Both terms are simply abuse masquerading as diagnoses and suggest that the person using them is engaged in propaganda rather than in any form of rational or objective discourse.

Leftists often pretend that any mention of race is "racist" -- unless they mention it, of course. But leaving such irrational propaganda aside, which statements really are racist? Can statements of fact about race be "racist"? Such statements are simply either true or false. The most sweeping possible definition of racism is that a racist statement is a statement that includes a negative value judgment of some race. Absent that, a statement is not racist, for all that Leftists might howl that it is. Facts cannot be racist so nor is the simple statement of them racist. Here is a statement that cannot therefore be racist by itself, though it could be false: "Blacks are on average much less intelligent than whites". If it is false and someone utters it, he could simply be mistaken or misinformed.

Whatever your definition of racism, however, a statement that simply mentions race is not thereby racist -- though one would think otherwise from American Presidential election campaigns. Is a statement that mentions dogs, "doggist" or a statement that mentions cats, "cattist"?

Was Abraham Lincoln a racist? "You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word, we suffer on each side. If this be admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated. It is better for both, therefore, to be separated." -- Spoken at the White House to a group of black community leaders, August 14th, 1862

The spirit of liberty is "the spirit which is not too sure that it is right." and "Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it." -- Judge Learned Hand

Two lines below of a famous hymn that would be incomprehensible to Leftists today ("honor"? "right"? "freedom?" Freedom to agree with them is the only freedom they believe in)

First to fight for right and freedom,
And to keep our honor clean

It is of course the hymn of the USMC -- still today the relentless warriors that they always were.

It seems a pity that the wisdom of the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus is now little known. Remember, wrote the Stoic thinker, "that foul words or blows in themselves are no outrage, but your judgment that they are so. So when any one makes you angry, know that it is your own thought that has angered you. Wherefore make it your endeavour not to let your impressions carry you away."

"Since therefore the knowledge and survey of vice is in this world so necessary to the constituting of human virtue, and the scanning of error to the confirmation of truth, how can we more safely, and with less danger, scout into the regions of sin and falsity than by reading all manner of tractates, and hearing all manner of reason?" -- English poet John Milton (1608-1674) in Areopagitica

Hate speech is verbal communication that induces anger due to the listener's inability to offer an intelligent response

Leftists can try to get you fired from your job over something that you said and that's not an attack on free speech. But if you just criticize something that they say, then that IS an attack on free speech

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper

Why are Leftists always talking about hate? Because it fills their own hearts

Leftists don't have principles. How can they when "there is no such thing as right and wrong"? All they have is postures, pretend-principles that can be changed as easily as one changes one's shirt

When you have an argument with a Leftist, you are not really discussing the facts. You are threatening his self esteem. Which is why the normal Leftist response to challenge is mere abuse.

The naive scholar who searches for a consistent Leftist program will not find it. What there is consists only in the negation of the present.

The intellectual Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius (AD 121-180) could have been speaking of much that goes on today when he said: "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."