By any measure, the “Restoring Honor” rally staged by Glenn Beck on the Washington, D.C., Mall on the 28th was huge. The tip-off as to how meaningful it was came via CBS News soon after the affair was over when that outfit – Dan Rather’s own – indicated the crowd numbered 87,000. CBS suffers from the “sour grapes syndrome.” The New York Times, no lover of conservatives, estimated the crowd at some 300,000 souls and the consensus seems to be in the 250,000 to 350,000 range.
Actually, Beck took the opportunity to turn the whole nine yards into what once was called a “brush arbor revival,” harkening back to the late 19th-century meetings in rural areas featuring fervent preaching. In addition, he was wise enough not to make the observance into a tiring all-day affair, everything over in good order in about three-and-a-half hours. In his advertising of the event, Beck had requested that no signs be brought, and no protest signs were seen, though plenty of American flags were in evidence, as were thousands of young people and children.
Beck did not shock or surprise – there was no bait-and-switch. He had claimed that the rally would be religious in nature, a sort of “turning back to God at a time when the nation is floundering.” He was true to his word. He had also promised that the rally would not in any way be political. It was not…not even remotely, even though Sarah Palin, vice president candidate in 2008, was one of the few speakers.
Beck made a big deal of the M.L. King (“I have a dream”) event on 28 August 1963 in the same place, even flashing film of part of King’s effort on the huge screens set up so people who were far from the action could see it as well as everything else that happened at center stage, which was on a lower level in front of the Lincoln Memorial. A number of African Americans were part of the effort, including King’s niece, Dr. Alveda King, who also spoke. Also on the program were St. Louis Cardinals manager Tony LaRussa and first baseman Albert Pujols, who received an award for off-field charitable and religious work. Fabulously succesful businessman Jon M. Huntsman received an award for charitable giving…in his case, huge amounts.
Beck could easily be the envy of every preacher in the land…well-prepared and without notes or teleprompter, charismatic, spellbinding and very much in control. Unabashedly, he spoke about his religious faith and that the nation could only be saved from its obvious trend toward self-destruction by a return to the same kind of reliance on God that was evident on the part of the founding fathers. He made it plain, however, that there would need to be sacrifice on the part of the people and disclosed that he and his wife tithe the family income, the better to help the church do its job.
Beck made no pretense to credibility based on academic ahievements, mentioning that his college education consisted of one college course when he was age 30. In light of this, one wonders about other times when religious awakenings have happened in this country. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Billy Sunday, whose father, a Civil War soldier, died a month after Sunday’s birth in 1862, endured privation and orphanages, then became a professional baseball player-turned-evangelist and turned the country upside down with his preaching. Academia had not spoiled him.
In the late-nineteenth century, un-lettered Dwight L. Moody, a onetime shoe-store clerk, became the preeminent evangelist in both this country and the British Isles and later established what became the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago. He preached to millions in his weeks-long crusades at a time when there were no microphones and led tens of thousands to belief in Christ.
In the 20th century, Billy Graham, although well-educated in college and seminary, kept his sermons so simple that his peers have ridiculed him for being shallow. His accomplishments as an evangelist are so stupendous as to defy belief. He did not get bogged down in the fine points of homiletics…he merely “brought the word” without trying to pose as a know-it-all. The confidant of presidents, he earned the trust of the nation (the ordinary people, not the sophisticates) and didn’t talk down to anyone.
So…could it be that Beck, virtually self-educated beyond high school and inordinately successful career-wise while being an able communicator, might at least begin another awakening? Without question, while silly church leaders, seminary professors and other religionists argue about whether or not men should marry men (could anything be more off-the-wall?), religion as a force is on the wane in this country. According to Beck, the founders premised the nation on faith in God. He insists that this faith will save us or we’ll go down, not a collective faith but individual faith as each soul trusts. In this corner, the word is that he’s right. All over Washington is the inscription “In God We Trust.” But do we?
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Monday, August 30, 2010
Sunday, August 29, 2010
A Tale of Two Judges
It appears that former University of Kentucky basketball star Ed Davender stole about $100,000 from people he snookered into believing he could acquire basketball-game tickets for them. He pleaded guilty when caught. As a result, Circuit Judge James Ishmael recently sentenced him to eight years in prison.
Diane M. Montgomery, former assistant branch manager of a Lexington bank, pleaded guilty recently to embezzling $34,665 from the bank and has repaid about $33,500. Judge Ishmael sentenced her to three years. There’s no argument with the fact that prison time is appropriate for those who steal from others.
Former Bluegrass Airport Chief Michael Gobb and three of his subordinates in just a three-year period, 2006-08, managed to do away with $530,000 of airport funds on travel, meals, entertainment (like strip clubs, for instance), etc. State Auditor Crit Luallen looked into the shenanigans of these guys after the Lexington Herald-Leader (Jennifer Hewlett) exposed them. There’s no telling how much more they had stolen before 2006 but their pattern indicates that it must have been huge. All four were charged with felonies just for the thefts in the three-year period.
Gobb’s salary was nearly $220,000 annually with perks amounting to many thousands more, including a car, unlimited gas, club memberships, etc. The average salary of the other three was $139,318, plus a car and other perks. Apparently, their greed outstripped any susceptibility they might at some time have had concerning honesty. There was a bit of personal payback after they were caught. All four pleaded guilty at one time or another and appeared before Circuit Judge Pamela Goodwine. They received no prison time at all, just slaps on their respective wrists.
There’s something wrong with this. The first two had the book thrown at them by Judge Ishmael. The last four walked, courtesy of Judge Goodwine, even though they stole much more and even though tax monies from the city of Lexington were involved. Justice is supposed to be blind, but not this blind.
In this corner, there’s no wish that people go to jail, but there is the desire that people be treated equally. In this case and for whatever reason, legal or otherwise, one could certainly have reason to believe they apparently were not.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Diane M. Montgomery, former assistant branch manager of a Lexington bank, pleaded guilty recently to embezzling $34,665 from the bank and has repaid about $33,500. Judge Ishmael sentenced her to three years. There’s no argument with the fact that prison time is appropriate for those who steal from others.
Former Bluegrass Airport Chief Michael Gobb and three of his subordinates in just a three-year period, 2006-08, managed to do away with $530,000 of airport funds on travel, meals, entertainment (like strip clubs, for instance), etc. State Auditor Crit Luallen looked into the shenanigans of these guys after the Lexington Herald-Leader (Jennifer Hewlett) exposed them. There’s no telling how much more they had stolen before 2006 but their pattern indicates that it must have been huge. All four were charged with felonies just for the thefts in the three-year period.
Gobb’s salary was nearly $220,000 annually with perks amounting to many thousands more, including a car, unlimited gas, club memberships, etc. The average salary of the other three was $139,318, plus a car and other perks. Apparently, their greed outstripped any susceptibility they might at some time have had concerning honesty. There was a bit of personal payback after they were caught. All four pleaded guilty at one time or another and appeared before Circuit Judge Pamela Goodwine. They received no prison time at all, just slaps on their respective wrists.
There’s something wrong with this. The first two had the book thrown at them by Judge Ishmael. The last four walked, courtesy of Judge Goodwine, even though they stole much more and even though tax monies from the city of Lexington were involved. Justice is supposed to be blind, but not this blind.
In this corner, there’s no wish that people go to jail, but there is the desire that people be treated equally. In this case and for whatever reason, legal or otherwise, one could certainly have reason to believe they apparently were not.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
The Jim & Kim Show
Former president Jimmy Carter is in Pyonyang, North Korea, in order to beg for the release of 31-year-old Aijalon Gomes, who has been convicted of trespassing and a “hostile act.” The following is a transcript of Carter’s meeting with North Korean president/dictator-for-life Kim Jong Il, referenced as C and K, respectively, though not necessarily respectfully.
*K: It’s okay to get up off your knees now, Jimmy…it’s okay if I call you Jimmy…right?
*C: That’s right as rain in Jawgia and Ah’ll just call you Kimmy…okay?
*K: You most certainly may not! You will address me as either Eternal President or Supreme Leader – your call.
*C: Well…it’s good to see you again, Su…could Ah just shorten that to SL…after all, we’ve been good friends since 1994 when Ah came over to set up that world-shakin’ non-nuke treaty for President Clinton and…
*K: (coldly) It will be Supreme Leader or you’re outta here, Jimmy boy, and I never considered you a friend in 1994 and as far as that treaty is concerned…oh, hoo-hah…did I ever slick old Slick on that one…we got nukes out our ears over here. We built them while you guys were sending us free rice to keep the daily workers from starving on the job….hoo-hah…by the way, how’s old Bill? He was here last year to get out Al Gore’s two girls we caught trespassing…h-m-m-m…did they get home without…you know…without…that Monica thing all over?
*C: Ah’m not at liberty to discuss his…well…he was smart enough to beat that rap by hangin’ the whole thing on what is is. He explained the whole thing on Larry King Live, which made it perfectly ironclad. Anyway, why didn’t you let Mr. Gomes go when President Obama told Secretary Clinton to send over those official representatives earlier this month? They came and you sent ’em packin’.
*K: I just love to jerk you Americans around. I told Ms. Clinton that an ex-president would come…or else. Same thing last year! I told all my people the same thing and they’ve been laughing ever since…jerking around the biggest military machine in the world…oh, hoo-hah…double hoo-hah! She even offered Jesse Jackson and I said ‘no way.’
*C: Ah guess the next trespassin’ American can only be sprung if George Bush – our mutual enemy – comes callin’.
*K: Not a chance! That double-dealing Bush wouldn’t talk to me about anything…kept insisting on six-nation tea parties…goons like the Chinese and Russians included, not to mention that turncoat South Korea gang and their rich automobile-factory workers…enough to make me as sick as my starving countrymen…by the way, we need more free rice…with maybe a little gumbo thrown in…or even some barbecue…(sighs)
*C: Ah’ll just speak to Barack about that – Ah’m on a first name basis with the president, doncha know – but he’s on vacation right now and…
*K: Did he take his teleprompter or his wife…oh, hoo-hah…did he actually say “corpse-man” in that speech? He should have nuked that teleprompter technician…I would have had him water-boarded all night and then shot at sunrise.
*C: We progressive democrats don’t believe in torture, Supreme Leader. That evil Bush and even more evil Cheney…they believed in…
*K: With all due respect, Jimmy – and that’s not much…hoo-hah – you progressive democrats would hand over the country to most anybody if…look how Ahmadinejad is jerking you around right now. That cowboy would water-board his best friend if…besides, water-boarding doesn’t even injure, much less kill. I favor better stuff…like 20 volts to the family jewels, if you get my drift. Look what we did to that South Korean ship the other day…bottom of the sea now…oh, hoo-hah…46 dead and, hopefully, still counting!
*C: Well…Ah had to fly commercial instead of on Air Force 2 because of your demands and the service was terrible, besides which, most people didn’t recognize me and one smart aleck kept repeating, ‘Oh Remember Oslo and the Alamo and the hostages of long ago.’ He even sang it to the tune of September Song…terribly embarrassing.
*K: Hey, Jimmy, not to fret. Every time you left your country and degraded it, like in Oslo with that Peace Prize speech – oh, hoo-hah, Peace Prize – I laughed while throwing darts at my new ‘Bush dartboard,’ custom-made with Cheney on the other side. And now the Muslim butchers are jerking around New York – what you call it…the Big Apple? – by building that mosque at Ground Zero. Oh…hoo-hah…wait till those muezzins cut loose with that unearthly whine five times a day…like this…I learned it from Howard Dean TV in 2004…a-a-a-r-r-r-h-h-h-g-g-g-A-A-A-R-R-R-G-G-G-H-H-H-A-A-A-R-R-R-G-G-G-H-H-H – ON TO WISCONSIN! (bodyguards rush in and administer CPR) They (gasping) will stop traffic and scare small children…hoo-hah…and people will get knocked down when they jerk around to face the East.
*C: Ah don’t appreciate that talk about Muslim butchers, Supreme Leader. Ah’m a tolerant man and Ah believe in freedom of religion and all that other First Amendment good stuff. Besides, Khomeini didn’t kill any o’ those hostages back in 1979…or was it ’80…or was it ’81…or…
*K: It was all three, Jimmy…a long time and it would have been a lot longer except for that movie actor that scared the Russkies so bad that they imploded and even pulled out of Afghanistan after only 25,000 dead Russian soldiers…a mere nothing, as wars go…just the hoi poloi, anyway.
*C: Well, they have a right to be there…though Ah don’t have a dog in that fight. That’s Bloomberg’s problem.
*K: What if the Southern Baptists wanted to build a mosque there and broadcast Amazing Grace all over Manhattan five times a day?
*C: Whoa…back up right there…with all due respect…lots of it, o’ course. You’ve gone to meddlin’ now. We’re talkin’ religion here, not Southern Baptists. They didn’t accept my theology back in the day, so that proves they’re not religious. But let’s get back to Mr. Gomes. Ah’d like to leave right away…Rosalyn’s with me this time and she sets the schedule, as usual.
*K: What’s your best offer, Jimmy? I’d like to have California, with all those illegals to work in the rice paddies and not talk back since they’ll never learn Korean…work them 18 hours a day till they starve. Gomes got eight years but I don’t plan on feeding him while my people are still eating grass…so draw your own conclusions.
*C: Ah promise to see Barack as soon as Ah get back and suggest California as a fair trade for Gomes, but you ought to let me take him as far as the Philippines as a sort of guarantee.
*K: Check with me in the morning, Jimmy, and in the meantime chow down on rice in 44 different flavors. That’s all we have…a sort of oriental Baskin-Robbins.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
*K: It’s okay to get up off your knees now, Jimmy…it’s okay if I call you Jimmy…right?
*C: That’s right as rain in Jawgia and Ah’ll just call you Kimmy…okay?
*K: You most certainly may not! You will address me as either Eternal President or Supreme Leader – your call.
*C: Well…it’s good to see you again, Su…could Ah just shorten that to SL…after all, we’ve been good friends since 1994 when Ah came over to set up that world-shakin’ non-nuke treaty for President Clinton and…
*K: (coldly) It will be Supreme Leader or you’re outta here, Jimmy boy, and I never considered you a friend in 1994 and as far as that treaty is concerned…oh, hoo-hah…did I ever slick old Slick on that one…we got nukes out our ears over here. We built them while you guys were sending us free rice to keep the daily workers from starving on the job….hoo-hah…by the way, how’s old Bill? He was here last year to get out Al Gore’s two girls we caught trespassing…h-m-m-m…did they get home without…you know…without…that Monica thing all over?
*C: Ah’m not at liberty to discuss his…well…he was smart enough to beat that rap by hangin’ the whole thing on what is is. He explained the whole thing on Larry King Live, which made it perfectly ironclad. Anyway, why didn’t you let Mr. Gomes go when President Obama told Secretary Clinton to send over those official representatives earlier this month? They came and you sent ’em packin’.
*K: I just love to jerk you Americans around. I told Ms. Clinton that an ex-president would come…or else. Same thing last year! I told all my people the same thing and they’ve been laughing ever since…jerking around the biggest military machine in the world…oh, hoo-hah…double hoo-hah! She even offered Jesse Jackson and I said ‘no way.’
*C: Ah guess the next trespassin’ American can only be sprung if George Bush – our mutual enemy – comes callin’.
*K: Not a chance! That double-dealing Bush wouldn’t talk to me about anything…kept insisting on six-nation tea parties…goons like the Chinese and Russians included, not to mention that turncoat South Korea gang and their rich automobile-factory workers…enough to make me as sick as my starving countrymen…by the way, we need more free rice…with maybe a little gumbo thrown in…or even some barbecue…(sighs)
*C: Ah’ll just speak to Barack about that – Ah’m on a first name basis with the president, doncha know – but he’s on vacation right now and…
*K: Did he take his teleprompter or his wife…oh, hoo-hah…did he actually say “corpse-man” in that speech? He should have nuked that teleprompter technician…I would have had him water-boarded all night and then shot at sunrise.
*C: We progressive democrats don’t believe in torture, Supreme Leader. That evil Bush and even more evil Cheney…they believed in…
*K: With all due respect, Jimmy – and that’s not much…hoo-hah – you progressive democrats would hand over the country to most anybody if…look how Ahmadinejad is jerking you around right now. That cowboy would water-board his best friend if…besides, water-boarding doesn’t even injure, much less kill. I favor better stuff…like 20 volts to the family jewels, if you get my drift. Look what we did to that South Korean ship the other day…bottom of the sea now…oh, hoo-hah…46 dead and, hopefully, still counting!
*C: Well…Ah had to fly commercial instead of on Air Force 2 because of your demands and the service was terrible, besides which, most people didn’t recognize me and one smart aleck kept repeating, ‘Oh Remember Oslo and the Alamo and the hostages of long ago.’ He even sang it to the tune of September Song…terribly embarrassing.
*K: Hey, Jimmy, not to fret. Every time you left your country and degraded it, like in Oslo with that Peace Prize speech – oh, hoo-hah, Peace Prize – I laughed while throwing darts at my new ‘Bush dartboard,’ custom-made with Cheney on the other side. And now the Muslim butchers are jerking around New York – what you call it…the Big Apple? – by building that mosque at Ground Zero. Oh…hoo-hah…wait till those muezzins cut loose with that unearthly whine five times a day…like this…I learned it from Howard Dean TV in 2004…a-a-a-r-r-r-h-h-h-g-g-g-A-A-A-R-R-R-G-G-G-H-H-H-A-A-A-R-R-R-G-G-G-H-H-H – ON TO WISCONSIN! (bodyguards rush in and administer CPR) They (gasping) will stop traffic and scare small children…hoo-hah…and people will get knocked down when they jerk around to face the East.
*C: Ah don’t appreciate that talk about Muslim butchers, Supreme Leader. Ah’m a tolerant man and Ah believe in freedom of religion and all that other First Amendment good stuff. Besides, Khomeini didn’t kill any o’ those hostages back in 1979…or was it ’80…or was it ’81…or…
*K: It was all three, Jimmy…a long time and it would have been a lot longer except for that movie actor that scared the Russkies so bad that they imploded and even pulled out of Afghanistan after only 25,000 dead Russian soldiers…a mere nothing, as wars go…just the hoi poloi, anyway.
*C: Well, they have a right to be there…though Ah don’t have a dog in that fight. That’s Bloomberg’s problem.
*K: What if the Southern Baptists wanted to build a mosque there and broadcast Amazing Grace all over Manhattan five times a day?
*C: Whoa…back up right there…with all due respect…lots of it, o’ course. You’ve gone to meddlin’ now. We’re talkin’ religion here, not Southern Baptists. They didn’t accept my theology back in the day, so that proves they’re not religious. But let’s get back to Mr. Gomes. Ah’d like to leave right away…Rosalyn’s with me this time and she sets the schedule, as usual.
*K: What’s your best offer, Jimmy? I’d like to have California, with all those illegals to work in the rice paddies and not talk back since they’ll never learn Korean…work them 18 hours a day till they starve. Gomes got eight years but I don’t plan on feeding him while my people are still eating grass…so draw your own conclusions.
*C: Ah promise to see Barack as soon as Ah get back and suggest California as a fair trade for Gomes, but you ought to let me take him as far as the Philippines as a sort of guarantee.
*K: Check with me in the morning, Jimmy, and in the meantime chow down on rice in 44 different flavors. That’s all we have…a sort of oriental Baskin-Robbins.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
U.S. Constitution & Koran
Concerning the mosque at Ground Zero, this is the preamble to the U.S. Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution: “The Congress shall have Power to … provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States … .” Article II (presidential oath): “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will … preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article II, Section 2: “The President shall be Commader in Chief of the Army and Navy of the Unied States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States.”
In the wake of the Ft. Hood massacre last year, president Obama rightly indicated that under no concept of religion would a deed such as that of Major Hasan be acceptable, i.e., that God would never order or condone cold-blooded murder. Yet, Major Hasan screamed “Allahu Allah” as he committed his heinous crime, attributing to his god, Allah, the order for his act. So…which did the president mean in his statement – Judeo-Christian God or Allah?
The Constitution is a written document setting up the U.S. government and, though it can be amended and requires interpretation as time passes, is set in concrete. The Koran is a document setting up Islam, which is remarked by Muslims and most everyone else as a religion. It is interpreted by Islamic scholars and functionaries as time passes but is also set in concrete and cannot be amended or otherwise changed. Accepted throughout the world is the fact as fixed in concrete in the Koran (see Surah 2,3,8, for instance) that Muslims are required to kill infidels (unbelievers in Allah), yet most Muslims do not carry out this requirement, though for widely differing reasons, undoubtedly among which is the risk of being caught.
Considering the responsibilities of both the Congress and the president, the question has to do with whether or not Islam is to be considered as a religion, with its adherents entitled to First Amendment protections. If it isn’t a religion – at least in this country – what is it and how should it be addressed? More to the point, if it demands that an adherent commit a crime, especially the crime of murder, has it become a secular instrument entirely and certainly not susceptible to consideration within the context of religion?
The answer to this question is in the affirmative. Neither the president nor a Congressperson would sit still for any First Amendment protection for the Klu Klux Klan or the Weather Underground (shades of Obama colleague Bill Ayers) or the Black Panthers, all of which outfits have demanded violence against those with whom they disagree, or even against the government itself. Without any question, the Koran demands violence of its adherents against anyone not a Muslim (including non-Muslim governments), is pervasive worldwide including among millions in the U.S., and consequently of its own volition advocates what are considered criminal acts in this and most other civilized countries.
This makes the Koran a purely secular instrument and Islam a movement, not a religion. More accurately, as taught and practiced by despotic Muslim leaders such as Iran’s Ayatollah Khameini and President Ahmadinejad, it is a terrorist movement advocating the overthrow of entire societies and/or governments, not to mention the murders of individuals, even within the ranks of its believers. Whole nations such as Iran, Algeria, Libya, Sudan and Yemen are governed officially by Muslims and therefore have become “killer nations” as demanded by the Koran.
Though the events of 11 September 2001 comprised the worst act of war ever perpetrated by anyone or any group on U.S. soil, the heinous murders carried out in the name of Allah throughout the world by jihadists on a daily basis give the lie to any Muslim claim that Islam is a religion, since in most countries murder is a crime. In Muslim law (Sharia, as practiced in Iran and Afghanistan), public-stoning-to-death is the penalty for certain crimes against Allah. If a mosque is built in New York City and the imam decides to have someone stoned to death, even within the confines of the mosque and not public, would the mayor or police commissioner do anything to stop a “relgious” observance?
The answer to that question, hopefully, is “yes,” though one can’t be too sure anymore since political correctness trumps every consideration, but if the president, Congress and all public officials are to operate within the oaths they take to see to the defense and welfare of this country, they must not treat Islam as a religion, meaning that it is not protected by the First Amendment. It is terrorism masquerading as a religion. The mosque should not be allowed at Ground Zero or anywhere else. The mosque in Hamburg, Germany, that was used by the planners of 9/11 has been closed by the German government (Washington Post, 09 August). The reason is obvious and hopefully not a lesson too late for the learning.
Last weekend was the 65th anniversary of the actual ending of WWII, with the surrender of the Japanese. The president celebrated it by extolling the virtues of mosque-building in Manhattan, where the “holy men” delivered the 2001 version of Pearl Harbor (nearly the same number butchered in each)…right to the Big Apple.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution: “The Congress shall have Power to … provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States … .” Article II (presidential oath): “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will … preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Article II, Section 2: “The President shall be Commader in Chief of the Army and Navy of the Unied States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States.”
In the wake of the Ft. Hood massacre last year, president Obama rightly indicated that under no concept of religion would a deed such as that of Major Hasan be acceptable, i.e., that God would never order or condone cold-blooded murder. Yet, Major Hasan screamed “Allahu Allah” as he committed his heinous crime, attributing to his god, Allah, the order for his act. So…which did the president mean in his statement – Judeo-Christian God or Allah?
The Constitution is a written document setting up the U.S. government and, though it can be amended and requires interpretation as time passes, is set in concrete. The Koran is a document setting up Islam, which is remarked by Muslims and most everyone else as a religion. It is interpreted by Islamic scholars and functionaries as time passes but is also set in concrete and cannot be amended or otherwise changed. Accepted throughout the world is the fact as fixed in concrete in the Koran (see Surah 2,3,8, for instance) that Muslims are required to kill infidels (unbelievers in Allah), yet most Muslims do not carry out this requirement, though for widely differing reasons, undoubtedly among which is the risk of being caught.
Considering the responsibilities of both the Congress and the president, the question has to do with whether or not Islam is to be considered as a religion, with its adherents entitled to First Amendment protections. If it isn’t a religion – at least in this country – what is it and how should it be addressed? More to the point, if it demands that an adherent commit a crime, especially the crime of murder, has it become a secular instrument entirely and certainly not susceptible to consideration within the context of religion?
The answer to this question is in the affirmative. Neither the president nor a Congressperson would sit still for any First Amendment protection for the Klu Klux Klan or the Weather Underground (shades of Obama colleague Bill Ayers) or the Black Panthers, all of which outfits have demanded violence against those with whom they disagree, or even against the government itself. Without any question, the Koran demands violence of its adherents against anyone not a Muslim (including non-Muslim governments), is pervasive worldwide including among millions in the U.S., and consequently of its own volition advocates what are considered criminal acts in this and most other civilized countries.
This makes the Koran a purely secular instrument and Islam a movement, not a religion. More accurately, as taught and practiced by despotic Muslim leaders such as Iran’s Ayatollah Khameini and President Ahmadinejad, it is a terrorist movement advocating the overthrow of entire societies and/or governments, not to mention the murders of individuals, even within the ranks of its believers. Whole nations such as Iran, Algeria, Libya, Sudan and Yemen are governed officially by Muslims and therefore have become “killer nations” as demanded by the Koran.
Though the events of 11 September 2001 comprised the worst act of war ever perpetrated by anyone or any group on U.S. soil, the heinous murders carried out in the name of Allah throughout the world by jihadists on a daily basis give the lie to any Muslim claim that Islam is a religion, since in most countries murder is a crime. In Muslim law (Sharia, as practiced in Iran and Afghanistan), public-stoning-to-death is the penalty for certain crimes against Allah. If a mosque is built in New York City and the imam decides to have someone stoned to death, even within the confines of the mosque and not public, would the mayor or police commissioner do anything to stop a “relgious” observance?
The answer to that question, hopefully, is “yes,” though one can’t be too sure anymore since political correctness trumps every consideration, but if the president, Congress and all public officials are to operate within the oaths they take to see to the defense and welfare of this country, they must not treat Islam as a religion, meaning that it is not protected by the First Amendment. It is terrorism masquerading as a religion. The mosque should not be allowed at Ground Zero or anywhere else. The mosque in Hamburg, Germany, that was used by the planners of 9/11 has been closed by the German government (Washington Post, 09 August). The reason is obvious and hopefully not a lesson too late for the learning.
Last weekend was the 65th anniversary of the actual ending of WWII, with the surrender of the Japanese. The president celebrated it by extolling the virtues of mosque-building in Manhattan, where the “holy men” delivered the 2001 version of Pearl Harbor (nearly the same number butchered in each)…right to the Big Apple.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Sunday, August 15, 2010
DNC Memorandum #17
From the office of Tim Kaine, chairman, 15 August 2010
***Note that the title for this office has been changed back to “chairman.” Frankly, the people who count in the party (biggest givers, the capitalists) objected to the purposeful use of communist terms such as “commissar” and “commissariat” for the party, even though they understand that the president still intends to TRANSFORM the party and country into communality. The biggies, especially in Hollywood, have theirs safely stashed here and there in places like the Caymans and Switzerland (check with Senator Kerry for possibilities) and so can’t be hurt by the president’s insistence that the Constitution must be rewritten to allow for proper redistribution of wealth. Also, nasty republicans have been heard calling the DNC a bunch of Obamacacas (Obama’s monkeys, for recent Harvard grads who think a macaca is a rum-and-bottled water). The use of the term “macaca” was gangbusters for former Virginia Senator Allen, and the party can’t take a chance on even a joking linkup of it with democrats.
***The elections are only weeks away so staffers will soon be given a red/yellow/black/white politically correct paper for use in preparing for door-to-door love-ins with democrats and confrontations with republicans, as well as how to manipulate the public at rallies for specific candidates. In Pennsylvania, for instance, the subject must be guided toward the bravery of Congressman Sestak in overcoming turncoat Arlen Specter in the primary, not about the offer by former POTUS Clinton, representing POTUS Obama, of a position in the Administration in exchange for Sestak’s stepping aside. The rumor is not true that POTUS did not approve of Sestak because he was a naval vice admiral and might not, for reasons of conscience (that military thing) and independence (as a civilian no longer accountable to the commander-in-chief), toe the Reid/Pelosi/Obama line, assuming R and P make it back, iffy at the moment.
***While awaiting the yellow/black/white/red paper (order adjusted to keep political correctness in place), staffers are directed as they attend events around the country not to mention – REPEAT – not to mention either the economy or the Afghan situation…and certainly not – REPEAT – not the recent trip by POTUS-FL and daughter for, among other things, a tete-a-tete with the King and Queen of Spain. That trip cost the nation a bundle at a time when people are losing their houses and jobs in record numbers and 25% of folks are out of work. If the subject arises, simply state that POTUS-FL was pushing Gulf Coast tourism and Gulf seafood as a special favor to entrepreneurs on the Gulf who have been damaged by BP. Do NOT mention that Spain is bankrupt since that might give the impression that Spanish folks are too broke for either vacations or seafood. Make it plain that Rahm Emanuel has stated that the trip was not made in order to gain the Latino vote and that he will not so state again.
***There has been snickering around the bottled-water keg and non-trans-fat, non-hamburger (eating grease okay if Senator Biden does), non-hotdog, non-dairy-product-of-any-kind, non-chocolate, non-smoking (smoking okay if Obama lights up), veggie-fortified, yogurt-enhanced snack-bar and body-mass-chart, carbon-cap-graph, endangered-species-obituary-wall-chart, blue/red-state-map, and Bush/BP/Limbaugh-dartboard to the effect that POTUS officially threw Congressman Rangel under the bus in a speech the other day, claiming that, after all, he’s 80 years old and should give it up. The point to be made is that POTUS said Rangel must go with dignity (another way of suggesting ’fessing up – little joke there) and now is the time to do it…without the hassle of an ethics brouhaha right before an election. Anyone with pull with Congresswoman Waters is urged to urge her to also ’fess up and cut the crap. Especially with the charges against them, both are guaranteed to retain their seats in November since they represent precincts that understand their shenanigans so they have nothing to lose. Remember Congressman Jefferson – reelected in 2006 even with all that $90,000 stashed among the frozen chicken wings. Okay, he’s doing time now.
***No black/white/red/yellow paper (order adjusted again to keep political correctness in place) papers have been received as per the request of Attorney General Holder concerning an up-to-date definition of the “typical white person.” AG Holder has been getting flak account his assertion that Americans are too cowardly to discuss race and he suspects that the flak is coming from typical white people, whoever they are. POTUS also is interested and has been somewhat bothered by the fact that media people have inquired of Robert Glibs…er, Gibbs as to the definition of a “typical black person.” The staffer who comes up with an acceptable white/red/yellow/black paper (order adjusted again to keep political correctness in place) defining both “typical people” will be awarded two weeks vacation on the Gulf Coast, unfortunately the only politically correct area at this time. He/she will be given the opportunity to help with cleanup, though most of the oil can’t be found at the present time.
***The lawmakers are off until Labor Day, so the country is safe for a few weeks (little joke there). NOTICE: In a few days, as per the ruling of Justice Walker of the Ninth Circuit, staffers may marry their same-sex partners in California. It’s not known if the justice is in a loving relationship with his partner or not, or even if he has a fulltime partner, but staffers wanting to marry their partners will be reassigned to California upon application if they at least exchange warm-fuzzies and hugs for a three-month period. No prying will be done into other stuff. No relocation allowances will be paid, so a DNC partner with a non-working, non-DNC partner might do well to make the move and find another partner, though republican partners will not be acceptable even after three months of ecstasy.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
***Note that the title for this office has been changed back to “chairman.” Frankly, the people who count in the party (biggest givers, the capitalists) objected to the purposeful use of communist terms such as “commissar” and “commissariat” for the party, even though they understand that the president still intends to TRANSFORM the party and country into communality. The biggies, especially in Hollywood, have theirs safely stashed here and there in places like the Caymans and Switzerland (check with Senator Kerry for possibilities) and so can’t be hurt by the president’s insistence that the Constitution must be rewritten to allow for proper redistribution of wealth. Also, nasty republicans have been heard calling the DNC a bunch of Obamacacas (Obama’s monkeys, for recent Harvard grads who think a macaca is a rum-and-bottled water). The use of the term “macaca” was gangbusters for former Virginia Senator Allen, and the party can’t take a chance on even a joking linkup of it with democrats.
***The elections are only weeks away so staffers will soon be given a red/yellow/black/white politically correct paper for use in preparing for door-to-door love-ins with democrats and confrontations with republicans, as well as how to manipulate the public at rallies for specific candidates. In Pennsylvania, for instance, the subject must be guided toward the bravery of Congressman Sestak in overcoming turncoat Arlen Specter in the primary, not about the offer by former POTUS Clinton, representing POTUS Obama, of a position in the Administration in exchange for Sestak’s stepping aside. The rumor is not true that POTUS did not approve of Sestak because he was a naval vice admiral and might not, for reasons of conscience (that military thing) and independence (as a civilian no longer accountable to the commander-in-chief), toe the Reid/Pelosi/Obama line, assuming R and P make it back, iffy at the moment.
***While awaiting the yellow/black/white/red paper (order adjusted to keep political correctness in place), staffers are directed as they attend events around the country not to mention – REPEAT – not to mention either the economy or the Afghan situation…and certainly not – REPEAT – not the recent trip by POTUS-FL and daughter for, among other things, a tete-a-tete with the King and Queen of Spain. That trip cost the nation a bundle at a time when people are losing their houses and jobs in record numbers and 25% of folks are out of work. If the subject arises, simply state that POTUS-FL was pushing Gulf Coast tourism and Gulf seafood as a special favor to entrepreneurs on the Gulf who have been damaged by BP. Do NOT mention that Spain is bankrupt since that might give the impression that Spanish folks are too broke for either vacations or seafood. Make it plain that Rahm Emanuel has stated that the trip was not made in order to gain the Latino vote and that he will not so state again.
***There has been snickering around the bottled-water keg and non-trans-fat, non-hamburger (eating grease okay if Senator Biden does), non-hotdog, non-dairy-product-of-any-kind, non-chocolate, non-smoking (smoking okay if Obama lights up), veggie-fortified, yogurt-enhanced snack-bar and body-mass-chart, carbon-cap-graph, endangered-species-obituary-wall-chart, blue/red-state-map, and Bush/BP/Limbaugh-dartboard to the effect that POTUS officially threw Congressman Rangel under the bus in a speech the other day, claiming that, after all, he’s 80 years old and should give it up. The point to be made is that POTUS said Rangel must go with dignity (another way of suggesting ’fessing up – little joke there) and now is the time to do it…without the hassle of an ethics brouhaha right before an election. Anyone with pull with Congresswoman Waters is urged to urge her to also ’fess up and cut the crap. Especially with the charges against them, both are guaranteed to retain their seats in November since they represent precincts that understand their shenanigans so they have nothing to lose. Remember Congressman Jefferson – reelected in 2006 even with all that $90,000 stashed among the frozen chicken wings. Okay, he’s doing time now.
***No black/white/red/yellow paper (order adjusted again to keep political correctness in place) papers have been received as per the request of Attorney General Holder concerning an up-to-date definition of the “typical white person.” AG Holder has been getting flak account his assertion that Americans are too cowardly to discuss race and he suspects that the flak is coming from typical white people, whoever they are. POTUS also is interested and has been somewhat bothered by the fact that media people have inquired of Robert Glibs…er, Gibbs as to the definition of a “typical black person.” The staffer who comes up with an acceptable white/red/yellow/black paper (order adjusted again to keep political correctness in place) defining both “typical people” will be awarded two weeks vacation on the Gulf Coast, unfortunately the only politically correct area at this time. He/she will be given the opportunity to help with cleanup, though most of the oil can’t be found at the present time.
***The lawmakers are off until Labor Day, so the country is safe for a few weeks (little joke there). NOTICE: In a few days, as per the ruling of Justice Walker of the Ninth Circuit, staffers may marry their same-sex partners in California. It’s not known if the justice is in a loving relationship with his partner or not, or even if he has a fulltime partner, but staffers wanting to marry their partners will be reassigned to California upon application if they at least exchange warm-fuzzies and hugs for a three-month period. No prying will be done into other stuff. No relocation allowances will be paid, so a DNC partner with a non-working, non-DNC partner might do well to make the move and find another partner, though republican partners will not be acceptable even after three months of ecstasy.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Homosexuals & the Military
So…it turns out that the WikiLeaker primary source was a homosexual U.S. soldier who, according to news accounts, was ridiculed and shunned by the “straights.” Bradley Manning should never have been accepted in the army but he didn’t tell and couldn’t be asked, the result of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” action taken by the Clinton administration. The chickens have come home to roost. According to the military, the release of the hacker-purloined information by Australian nutcase Julian Assange, the WikiLeak honcho, has put lives in jeopardy in Afghanistan, and the Afghans have made it clear that they will act upon the information, meaning torture and death to anyone helping Americans.
The fact that the tribal chiefs or al Qaeda or the Taliban consider life so cheap that they commit Muslim-on-Muslim killing as a routine matter in the name of Allah makes it easy to believe that they will get their revenge. Indeed, murder seems to be a pleasant pastime for Afghan Muslim men, and the only thing better than killing each other is killing Americans or other “infidels.”
This revelation comes at a bad time for Defense Secretary Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen in that they are kowtowing to the Obama insistence concerning his promise to fill the military with homosexuals. Both of these men have been overly zealous in their insistence that this change not be made precipitously and thereby seem determined that it does not happen on their watch, if ever. Already, the top military commanders have made it plain that they do not want this change. In so doing, they have put their positions in jeopardy but apparently operate under the conviction that duty demands such sacrifice.
The reasons – at least to men, especially in the military – for not putting this promise into effect are patently obvious. No matter how good a face the social engineers try to put on homosexuality, it is still a perversion involving behavior that is both aberrant and abhorrent, not to mention with an exponential threat to health. Surely everyone is aware of the predisposition of homosexuals to become infected with STDs, especially AIDS, as well as other diseases such as Hepatitis, especially since they are, in the main, grossly promiscuous.
There was a time when homosexuality was considered abnormal and could be part of the basis for determining hiring and firing. It has always been unacceptable in the military. The social engineers caved to the pressure of political correctness freaks and to the demands of homosexuals themselves in removing it from that category. The result has been that anyone not pandering to the demands of the homosexual crowd and their supporters is painted as a bigot. Property-owners are even forced to rent to homosexuals when even their religious convictions are violated when made to do so, an abridgment of their First Amendment rights.
To get an idea of the damage that homosexuals can do when privy to governmental classified information, one has only to remember the frightful instances of sellouts to the enemy occasioned by the British homosexual operatives (spy ring) during and after WWII. Perhaps it’s unfair to say their homosexuality was the only component operative in their disloyalty to their nation, but perhaps it’s fair to say that mere coincidence will not wash, either. Sexual perversion is a murky area, but that doesn’t mean it mustn’t be dealt with, even harshly if necessary.
Perhaps it’s fair to say that most homosexuals would just as soon not be “outed,” also taking note of the fact that some are anxious to do so and consider their “difference” as an admirable trait. The society has gradually – at least according to polls – become more accepting of homosexuals as a civil matter, though it’s probably fair to say the society thoroughly despises and is repelled by homosexual behavior. The fact remains that homosexuals-in-the-closet-by-choice who hold sensitive positions can be easily blackmailed. Most will ward it off. A few will not, so the best approach is to avoid the possibility.
Or…as may be the case in this instance, the homosexual, aggravated at being ignored – or even ridiculed – by his military colleagues (who understandably do not appreciate his company), may take out a sort of revenge, in this matter a sellout of classified information. This doesn’t mean that heterosexuals would never become angry over something and do the same, only that the possibility may be much greater with homosexuals who undergo treatment they consider debasing on a grinding daily basis.
In any case, the president should listen to the counsel of his commanders in the field and leave well-enough alone. National security must never be placed at risk by approving homosexuals for military service, especially as a sop to the social engineers who have pronounced political correctness and “diversity” as determinants in every matter.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
The fact that the tribal chiefs or al Qaeda or the Taliban consider life so cheap that they commit Muslim-on-Muslim killing as a routine matter in the name of Allah makes it easy to believe that they will get their revenge. Indeed, murder seems to be a pleasant pastime for Afghan Muslim men, and the only thing better than killing each other is killing Americans or other “infidels.”
This revelation comes at a bad time for Defense Secretary Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mullen in that they are kowtowing to the Obama insistence concerning his promise to fill the military with homosexuals. Both of these men have been overly zealous in their insistence that this change not be made precipitously and thereby seem determined that it does not happen on their watch, if ever. Already, the top military commanders have made it plain that they do not want this change. In so doing, they have put their positions in jeopardy but apparently operate under the conviction that duty demands such sacrifice.
The reasons – at least to men, especially in the military – for not putting this promise into effect are patently obvious. No matter how good a face the social engineers try to put on homosexuality, it is still a perversion involving behavior that is both aberrant and abhorrent, not to mention with an exponential threat to health. Surely everyone is aware of the predisposition of homosexuals to become infected with STDs, especially AIDS, as well as other diseases such as Hepatitis, especially since they are, in the main, grossly promiscuous.
There was a time when homosexuality was considered abnormal and could be part of the basis for determining hiring and firing. It has always been unacceptable in the military. The social engineers caved to the pressure of political correctness freaks and to the demands of homosexuals themselves in removing it from that category. The result has been that anyone not pandering to the demands of the homosexual crowd and their supporters is painted as a bigot. Property-owners are even forced to rent to homosexuals when even their religious convictions are violated when made to do so, an abridgment of their First Amendment rights.
To get an idea of the damage that homosexuals can do when privy to governmental classified information, one has only to remember the frightful instances of sellouts to the enemy occasioned by the British homosexual operatives (spy ring) during and after WWII. Perhaps it’s unfair to say their homosexuality was the only component operative in their disloyalty to their nation, but perhaps it’s fair to say that mere coincidence will not wash, either. Sexual perversion is a murky area, but that doesn’t mean it mustn’t be dealt with, even harshly if necessary.
Perhaps it’s fair to say that most homosexuals would just as soon not be “outed,” also taking note of the fact that some are anxious to do so and consider their “difference” as an admirable trait. The society has gradually – at least according to polls – become more accepting of homosexuals as a civil matter, though it’s probably fair to say the society thoroughly despises and is repelled by homosexual behavior. The fact remains that homosexuals-in-the-closet-by-choice who hold sensitive positions can be easily blackmailed. Most will ward it off. A few will not, so the best approach is to avoid the possibility.
Or…as may be the case in this instance, the homosexual, aggravated at being ignored – or even ridiculed – by his military colleagues (who understandably do not appreciate his company), may take out a sort of revenge, in this matter a sellout of classified information. This doesn’t mean that heterosexuals would never become angry over something and do the same, only that the possibility may be much greater with homosexuals who undergo treatment they consider debasing on a grinding daily basis.
In any case, the president should listen to the counsel of his commanders in the field and leave well-enough alone. National security must never be placed at risk by approving homosexuals for military service, especially as a sop to the social engineers who have pronounced political correctness and “diversity” as determinants in every matter.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Saturday, August 07, 2010
Madness Attacks California Again!
The California judge may have left himself out in left field on voiding Proposition Eight and the chances he will be overruled on the SCOTUS level (not the 9th Circuit) are quite good, though given the makeup of the court it could rule that marriages between men and kangaroos are legal. Article I, Section I of the U.S. Constitution: All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (Pub. L. 104-199, Sept. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2419) is a federal law that denies federal recognition of same-sex marriages and authorizes states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states.
The California judge thought he was interpreting the California Constitution, but he was actually ruling part of the U.S. Constitution to be un-Constitutional, i.e., that Congress actually has no power to define/enact anything. The courts interpret the laws but they cannot make laws, in this case nullifying DOMA. Marriage has been defined in the federal statutes, and unmistakably so. No same-sex marriage that has ever been codified anywhere in this country is a marriage that is legal. To enhance the definition of marriage, most states have defined them in their Constitutions anyway as being between one man and one woman, or at least one at a time.
If this judge’s ruling should stand, marriage will be what anyone says it is because he has ruled that the laws passed by Congress do not have to be obeyed, and by extension the laws in any of the states. It’s possible that given the right court the DOMA could be declared un-Constitutional but that’s at least a ways down the road. If that happens, such things as legal polygamy and legal incest (check out the Netherlands) and other types of multi-partner marriages or arrangements will be in line. Obviously, they could not be turned down.
As a practical matter, the Congress has spoken and only the Congress can undo what it has done, as was the case with Prohibition (Amendment 18). Under Prohibition, a citizen who insisted that his right to drink had been violated could have sued. I don’t know if that happened but the bubbly returned 14 years later only through a Constitutional amendment undoing another amendment. This should be the procedure in this matter with respect to law.
This may be the dumbest thing the judge wrote: Race and gender restrictions shaped marriage during eras of race and gender inequality, but such restrictions were never part of the historical core of the institution of marriage. This, besides being quite obviously off-the-wall (at least with normal people with normal feelings and a knowledge of the difference between genders and the reasons for it and the results of it), indicates no notice of physiology, especially with respect to children and the need to protect them legally. The ruling was based on political correctness, a national damnation that hopefully will soon be abandoned for the lunacy it is. The judge discovered a whole new set of victims, the most glorified folks in the country today.
Most of the 138-page decision was taken up with an examination of sociological evidence for and against same-sex marriage, according to MercatorNet. Judges supposedly rule on the law and not what they think about it. Since Judge Vaughan Walker is himself a homosexual, his attempt at actually codifying his own behavior is all the more egregious. It might have taken two pages to deliver an opinion based on law, but apparently Walker had an agenda in this era of activist judges attempting to overturn the Constitution and legislate from the bench. He was determined to negate what the majority of Californians had recently written into the state Constitution, setting the matter in concrete…138 pages – Egad!
One supposes the judge was declaring that women haven’t been equal to men with respect to marriage but then gave the world 138 pages proving that men are equal to men and should therefore be married to each other. Men have always been equal to men. Where do they find these people?
The most glaring recent example of judicial legislating was graphically shown last year in the accession to the Supreme Court of Justice Sotomayor. While she was a federal judge and without exercising the usual protocols in making a decision a few years ago, she ruled that qualified white firemen in a Connecticut city should be denied promotion because they were white. In 2008 at the same time the Supreme Court was in the process of overturning her decision, President Obama appointed her to the SCOTUS and a democrat-controlled Senate confirmed her. Go figure.
An even more recent – this week – example of judicial tampering was seen in the Senate confirmation to the SCOTUS of Elena Kagan, who, while she was the law-school dean at Harvard, denied military representatives access to her campus in direct violation of federal law. One would expect the dean to know the law and she probably did, but her agenda trumped the law and that’s the paradigm for the way she will rule on the highest court in the land. Where do they find these people?
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) (Pub. L. 104-199, Sept. 21, 1996, 110 Stat. 2419) is a federal law that denies federal recognition of same-sex marriages and authorizes states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states.
The California judge thought he was interpreting the California Constitution, but he was actually ruling part of the U.S. Constitution to be un-Constitutional, i.e., that Congress actually has no power to define/enact anything. The courts interpret the laws but they cannot make laws, in this case nullifying DOMA. Marriage has been defined in the federal statutes, and unmistakably so. No same-sex marriage that has ever been codified anywhere in this country is a marriage that is legal. To enhance the definition of marriage, most states have defined them in their Constitutions anyway as being between one man and one woman, or at least one at a time.
If this judge’s ruling should stand, marriage will be what anyone says it is because he has ruled that the laws passed by Congress do not have to be obeyed, and by extension the laws in any of the states. It’s possible that given the right court the DOMA could be declared un-Constitutional but that’s at least a ways down the road. If that happens, such things as legal polygamy and legal incest (check out the Netherlands) and other types of multi-partner marriages or arrangements will be in line. Obviously, they could not be turned down.
As a practical matter, the Congress has spoken and only the Congress can undo what it has done, as was the case with Prohibition (Amendment 18). Under Prohibition, a citizen who insisted that his right to drink had been violated could have sued. I don’t know if that happened but the bubbly returned 14 years later only through a Constitutional amendment undoing another amendment. This should be the procedure in this matter with respect to law.
This may be the dumbest thing the judge wrote: Race and gender restrictions shaped marriage during eras of race and gender inequality, but such restrictions were never part of the historical core of the institution of marriage. This, besides being quite obviously off-the-wall (at least with normal people with normal feelings and a knowledge of the difference between genders and the reasons for it and the results of it), indicates no notice of physiology, especially with respect to children and the need to protect them legally. The ruling was based on political correctness, a national damnation that hopefully will soon be abandoned for the lunacy it is. The judge discovered a whole new set of victims, the most glorified folks in the country today.
Most of the 138-page decision was taken up with an examination of sociological evidence for and against same-sex marriage, according to MercatorNet. Judges supposedly rule on the law and not what they think about it. Since Judge Vaughan Walker is himself a homosexual, his attempt at actually codifying his own behavior is all the more egregious. It might have taken two pages to deliver an opinion based on law, but apparently Walker had an agenda in this era of activist judges attempting to overturn the Constitution and legislate from the bench. He was determined to negate what the majority of Californians had recently written into the state Constitution, setting the matter in concrete…138 pages – Egad!
One supposes the judge was declaring that women haven’t been equal to men with respect to marriage but then gave the world 138 pages proving that men are equal to men and should therefore be married to each other. Men have always been equal to men. Where do they find these people?
The most glaring recent example of judicial legislating was graphically shown last year in the accession to the Supreme Court of Justice Sotomayor. While she was a federal judge and without exercising the usual protocols in making a decision a few years ago, she ruled that qualified white firemen in a Connecticut city should be denied promotion because they were white. In 2008 at the same time the Supreme Court was in the process of overturning her decision, President Obama appointed her to the SCOTUS and a democrat-controlled Senate confirmed her. Go figure.
An even more recent – this week – example of judicial tampering was seen in the Senate confirmation to the SCOTUS of Elena Kagan, who, while she was the law-school dean at Harvard, denied military representatives access to her campus in direct violation of federal law. One would expect the dean to know the law and she probably did, but her agenda trumped the law and that’s the paradigm for the way she will rule on the highest court in the land. Where do they find these people?
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Mosques...NIMBY
The loudly proclaimed objection nationwide accruing to the intention of Muslims to build a mosque hardly two blocks from “ground zero” in New York City is being discussed mostly on the basis of First Amendment rights with regard to the freedom of (and from) religion or religious practices. Notwithstanding that the perpetrators of the heinous crime of 9/11 were Muslims with the admitted purpose of their act being obeisance to their religion, i.e., not a crime, even New York Mayor Bloomberg considers the mosque within the parameters of religious practice.
Among the definitions of religion, the one that seems to apply in this case is “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” There is no mention of God or gods or even Allah, meaning that religion in this case is a civil/secular matter more than anything else. In other words, the traditional definition, “the service and worship of God or the supernatural: commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance” (also part of the same definition, Merriam-Webster Collegiate, 11th edition), does not apply…an interesting contradiction.
Even American imams and other Islamic leaders as well as rank-and-file Muslims admit that in the Koran, their so-called holy book, the command to kill infidels (anyone not Muslim) at every opportunity is extant. Most Muslims insist that they pay no heed to this “doctrine,” but they can’t escape the fact of its existence. In the Middle East on a daily basis, Muslims live up to this requirement, even to the point of killing each other in the process. If women and children are determined to be appropriate targets, so be it…in the name of Allah, their god, not to be confused with the Judeo-Christian God.
The question has to do with whether or not Islam is to be considered as a religion, with its adherents entitled to First Amendment protections, and this is where the rubber hits the road. If it isn’t a religion – at least in this country – what is it and how should it be addressed? More to the point, if it demands that an adherent commit a crime, has it become a secular instrument entirely and certainly not to be even considered within the context of religion.
In the Ft. Hood massacre, Major Hassan, acting in the name of religion (shouting Allah Akbar or some such thing), committed a heinous crime. While he may have thought he committed a religious act, he actually committed murder, as far as this society is concerned; otherwise, he would not be prosecuted. The First Amendment would have protected his religious right to kill people. This being the case, his supposed religion, Islam, is actually a terror-driven movement, rendering it unsusceptible to First Amendment rights. Islam is not a religion.
The obvious conclusion is that the people of New York City, acting through their elected officials or on their own, have the right to petition the NYC government in the interest of disallowing the building of the mosque. It is not a religious symbol in this country, since it requires criminal action on the part of its adherents, as shown by Hassan, the 9/11 butchers, the “shoe-bomber,” and the “skivvies bomber,” all of whom were committing or attempting criminal acts, namely, murders.
By extension, it can be concluded that mosque-building should be absolutely outlawed anywhere in the United States. Besides not being a protected religious symbol, many if not most of the mosques are the headquarters for jihad groups already in place in this country, as recently graphically shown in accounts in the media, further remarking the un-religious nature of the mosques. In Europe, Muslims are having an increasingly hard time in getting permission to build mosques and governments are also weighing in on the problem of women’s garb, which actually constitutes a sort of guerrilla camouflage that can also be used by men to do mischief such as gaining the 72 virgins through suicide/homicide. One wonders what the women bombers get out of it…72 gigolos, perhaps.
As long as that murderous requirement remains in the Koran, Islam is not a religion. The Koran was dictated by an illiterate named Mohammad probably to one of his wives and he is the only Muslim who can change the Koran. He died some 1400 or so years ago.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Among the definitions of religion, the one that seems to apply in this case is “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” There is no mention of God or gods or even Allah, meaning that religion in this case is a civil/secular matter more than anything else. In other words, the traditional definition, “the service and worship of God or the supernatural: commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance” (also part of the same definition, Merriam-Webster Collegiate, 11th edition), does not apply…an interesting contradiction.
Even American imams and other Islamic leaders as well as rank-and-file Muslims admit that in the Koran, their so-called holy book, the command to kill infidels (anyone not Muslim) at every opportunity is extant. Most Muslims insist that they pay no heed to this “doctrine,” but they can’t escape the fact of its existence. In the Middle East on a daily basis, Muslims live up to this requirement, even to the point of killing each other in the process. If women and children are determined to be appropriate targets, so be it…in the name of Allah, their god, not to be confused with the Judeo-Christian God.
The question has to do with whether or not Islam is to be considered as a religion, with its adherents entitled to First Amendment protections, and this is where the rubber hits the road. If it isn’t a religion – at least in this country – what is it and how should it be addressed? More to the point, if it demands that an adherent commit a crime, has it become a secular instrument entirely and certainly not to be even considered within the context of religion.
In the Ft. Hood massacre, Major Hassan, acting in the name of religion (shouting Allah Akbar or some such thing), committed a heinous crime. While he may have thought he committed a religious act, he actually committed murder, as far as this society is concerned; otherwise, he would not be prosecuted. The First Amendment would have protected his religious right to kill people. This being the case, his supposed religion, Islam, is actually a terror-driven movement, rendering it unsusceptible to First Amendment rights. Islam is not a religion.
The obvious conclusion is that the people of New York City, acting through their elected officials or on their own, have the right to petition the NYC government in the interest of disallowing the building of the mosque. It is not a religious symbol in this country, since it requires criminal action on the part of its adherents, as shown by Hassan, the 9/11 butchers, the “shoe-bomber,” and the “skivvies bomber,” all of whom were committing or attempting criminal acts, namely, murders.
By extension, it can be concluded that mosque-building should be absolutely outlawed anywhere in the United States. Besides not being a protected religious symbol, many if not most of the mosques are the headquarters for jihad groups already in place in this country, as recently graphically shown in accounts in the media, further remarking the un-religious nature of the mosques. In Europe, Muslims are having an increasingly hard time in getting permission to build mosques and governments are also weighing in on the problem of women’s garb, which actually constitutes a sort of guerrilla camouflage that can also be used by men to do mischief such as gaining the 72 virgins through suicide/homicide. One wonders what the women bombers get out of it…72 gigolos, perhaps.
As long as that murderous requirement remains in the Koran, Islam is not a religion. The Koran was dictated by an illiterate named Mohammad probably to one of his wives and he is the only Muslim who can change the Koran. He died some 1400 or so years ago.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Wednesday, August 04, 2010
Liquor-License Larceny
Most folks say that politics are the damnedest in their states so Kentucky is probably no worse than any other state. Citizens can be among the damnedest, too. After $90,000 was confiscated from among the frozen chicken-wings in former Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson’s deep-freeze, with tape of its transfer to him having been surreptitiously made in a semi-dark parking garage, he was reelected by the citizens to Congress in 2006. He was guilty of much greater graft and is now doing 13 years in a federal prison, presumably drawing his huge pension and living the good life.
Closer to home is the interesting business of the awarding of licenses to wannabe proprietors of liquor stores, this time in Danville, whose citizens decided that the community needed some strong stuff in stores, not just in saloons and restaurants. So…the city was entitled to six liquor licenses (package stores) and the locals made the proper applications to the state alcohol machinery (or chicanery, whatever) in Frankfort.
One would expect that the licenses would be awarded to the locals, fairness in government being the name of the game, with honesty and integrity promised by every office-seeker on every level since time immemorial. Successful applicants could then do the start-ups necessary to putting the bubbly on the shelves, adding income to the community, providing the absolutely necessary atmosphere to entice industry, etc., the latter perhaps the biggest fabrication of all. Loans would probably have to be engaged, facilities built or renovated, and inventory secured. All that takes time, of course.
But something happened on the way to a virtual whiskey-laden Camelot. Only three of the licenses were awarded to locals, no reason given for withholding the other three. There was a reason, of course – isn’t there always a reason? The other three went to folks from somewhere else, with no local ties to Danville…institutions already in the liquor-store business with probably no need to make any arrangements other than renting facilities, and with inventory immediately available to grab most or all of the business before the Danvillians could heave a healthy hiccup. One of the licenses went to a Canadian outfit, fer cryin’ out loud, but, after all, shouldn’t every small Kentucky town have a Canadian liquor store?
Of course, Danvillians were lucky to get half the stores. The license decisions concerning local option are not made locally, as common sense would dictate. No…those decisions are made in Frankfort, where patronage or political payoffs or rewards for campaign contributions or money under the table are the ruling factors. It could be that the governor himself might be in the decision-making process regarding liquor stores. One wonders what it was worth to the Canadian enterprise (and to the Frankfort providers of “services” to the Canadians). Of course, only the Shadow knows, although a first-grader can figure out where the profits wind up.
No sane person doubts that the licenses were handed out on the basis of graft. Indeed, Danville was probably lucky to get three out of six. It could just as easily have been one out of six. In fact, the liquor gurus could probably have awarded none just on the basis that no local applicant was worthy. There were only 18 applications – just not enough qualified folks in the Danville sector, but at least three elsewhere – like Canada. Making up rules on an ad hoc basis is nothing new. The hayseeds in Danville would not be expected to make a scene, especially since Canada is the country’s best trading-partner…NAFTA and all, doncha know!
Perhaps this wouldn’t come so readily to mind if it weren’t for the fact that in the newspaper every day there are numerous accounts of skullduggery among the officials, everything from vote-buying to embezzlement to assassinations. One has to laugh aloud when remembering the BopTrot scandals of the early 1990s in Kentucky culminating in a passel of legislators and bureaucrats trucking on down to the Big House. The Speaker was even forced to pay for his own keep.
The federal prosecutor in that episode was fired by President Clinton (in fact, all the nation’s prosecutors but one was fired – no reason given) or there might have been more incarcerations of the solons. A lead federal attorney, Steve Pence, wound up as lieutenant governor in the flawed Fletcher administration in 2003.
Bottom line – nothing new! Kentucky’s politics are still the damnedest! Let the liquor bubble all over Danville and the devil take the hindmost in the success or failure of the opportunists. Disclaimer alert: I’m a Prohibitionist!
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Closer to home is the interesting business of the awarding of licenses to wannabe proprietors of liquor stores, this time in Danville, whose citizens decided that the community needed some strong stuff in stores, not just in saloons and restaurants. So…the city was entitled to six liquor licenses (package stores) and the locals made the proper applications to the state alcohol machinery (or chicanery, whatever) in Frankfort.
One would expect that the licenses would be awarded to the locals, fairness in government being the name of the game, with honesty and integrity promised by every office-seeker on every level since time immemorial. Successful applicants could then do the start-ups necessary to putting the bubbly on the shelves, adding income to the community, providing the absolutely necessary atmosphere to entice industry, etc., the latter perhaps the biggest fabrication of all. Loans would probably have to be engaged, facilities built or renovated, and inventory secured. All that takes time, of course.
But something happened on the way to a virtual whiskey-laden Camelot. Only three of the licenses were awarded to locals, no reason given for withholding the other three. There was a reason, of course – isn’t there always a reason? The other three went to folks from somewhere else, with no local ties to Danville…institutions already in the liquor-store business with probably no need to make any arrangements other than renting facilities, and with inventory immediately available to grab most or all of the business before the Danvillians could heave a healthy hiccup. One of the licenses went to a Canadian outfit, fer cryin’ out loud, but, after all, shouldn’t every small Kentucky town have a Canadian liquor store?
Of course, Danvillians were lucky to get half the stores. The license decisions concerning local option are not made locally, as common sense would dictate. No…those decisions are made in Frankfort, where patronage or political payoffs or rewards for campaign contributions or money under the table are the ruling factors. It could be that the governor himself might be in the decision-making process regarding liquor stores. One wonders what it was worth to the Canadian enterprise (and to the Frankfort providers of “services” to the Canadians). Of course, only the Shadow knows, although a first-grader can figure out where the profits wind up.
No sane person doubts that the licenses were handed out on the basis of graft. Indeed, Danville was probably lucky to get three out of six. It could just as easily have been one out of six. In fact, the liquor gurus could probably have awarded none just on the basis that no local applicant was worthy. There were only 18 applications – just not enough qualified folks in the Danville sector, but at least three elsewhere – like Canada. Making up rules on an ad hoc basis is nothing new. The hayseeds in Danville would not be expected to make a scene, especially since Canada is the country’s best trading-partner…NAFTA and all, doncha know!
Perhaps this wouldn’t come so readily to mind if it weren’t for the fact that in the newspaper every day there are numerous accounts of skullduggery among the officials, everything from vote-buying to embezzlement to assassinations. One has to laugh aloud when remembering the BopTrot scandals of the early 1990s in Kentucky culminating in a passel of legislators and bureaucrats trucking on down to the Big House. The Speaker was even forced to pay for his own keep.
The federal prosecutor in that episode was fired by President Clinton (in fact, all the nation’s prosecutors but one was fired – no reason given) or there might have been more incarcerations of the solons. A lead federal attorney, Steve Pence, wound up as lieutenant governor in the flawed Fletcher administration in 2003.
Bottom line – nothing new! Kentucky’s politics are still the damnedest! Let the liquor bubble all over Danville and the devil take the hindmost in the success or failure of the opportunists. Disclaimer alert: I’m a Prohibitionist!
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Race-Card...Deja Vu
The annual conference of the National Urban League was held last week. This is from FoxNews of 28 July: "They're cutting back on public transportation," [Jesse] Jackson said during a morning panel discussion, "cutting back on public housing, cutting back on public ed[ucation]; and the result is [we] have built the largest jail-industrial complex in the world, of which 55 percent [of the inmate population] are black. To me that's the heart of the civil rights struggle."
So…this is what it’s come down to after all these years of entitlements, quotas, affirmative action, and thousands of African Americans elected to public office, with many in high-profile government positions and one even elected to the presidency, who last year nominated to the Supreme Court a judge who was in the process of being overturned by the SCOTUS as a federal judge in her decision to deny white people promotions because of their race. Jackson would say that blacks suffer because of racism, but Judge Sotomayor would prove it the other way; however, one dare not call her racist – absolutely politically incorrect.
Jackson, of course, was actually insisting that the government simply does not give blacks enough, his obvious implication being that the result is an unbelievably inordinate number of black men in jail. What on earth is the connection? It’s a lead-pipe cinch that far less than 55% of the jail population in the 1960s was black, when all the entitlements were passed into law. What happened as result of government actions in that amazing decade so fortuitous for blacks?
One is dumbstruck by Jackson’s allusion to public education. In the last reportable school-year, 2006-07, the average amount spent per pupil throughout the U.S. (13% African American) was $9,557. In the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C., 54% black), however, $16,540, or an increase of 73% over the national average, was spent per pupil. Ironically, that school-system, notwithstanding that inordinate expenditure, is probably the worst in the nation.
In D.C. the teacher-to-pupil ratio was 1:13.5 and the average annual teacher salary was $59,000. The national figures were 1:15.5 and $50,816, respectively so teachers in D.C. contend with much smaller classes while having incomes 16% higher than the national average. Most of the students in D.C. are black, 54% as opposed to 13% of the population nationwide, but the Rev. Jackson would have it that the government doesn’t spend enough on black students. This same paradigm is replicated in other large cities such as New York City and Detroit.
Colin Powell was appointed National Security Adviser by Reagan, Joint Chiefs Chairman by George H.W. Bush, and State Secretary by George Bush. Exhibiting his appreciation, Powell went for Obama in the last election. Ms. Rice was appointed National Security Adviser by George Bush and later State Secretary, meaning that the State Department was headed by African Americans for eight successive years.
Apparently, that doesn’t rise to “enough” for Jackson, nor does the election of a black president, who teleprompted his prowess in a speech on 02 August to disabled American veterans regarding the winding down of the Iraqi conflict although he has merely maintained the schedule established by George Bush. While in the Senate, Obama opposed the “surge,” which made the Iraq affair a winner for the U.S. The hypocrisy was apparent.
Race has been becoming a lesser issue in recent years, especially with the appointment and election to office of multitudes of blacks. With the advent of Obama as president should have come a downright death to the race issue. Instead, there’s been a resurgence in the matter of playing the “race card.” Obama’s “typical white person” remark in Philadelphia in 2008 coupled with his description of the “Bible-hugging, rifle-toting crowd on the hunt for Mexicans” in 2008, along with the “cowardice” remark of Attorney General Holder (another high-level black official) have ramped-up the rhetoric anew.
The “heart of the civil rights struggle” has nothing to do with prisons, as Jackson would have it. The heart of the struggle ended with the civil rights laws of the 1960s, which led directly to the near total dissolution of the black family, black men deciding against work and in favor of not being legally responsible for the products of their often indiscriminate impregnating of black women. The resulting welfare-society-permanent-underclass perpetuates itself as its boys with no fathers to guide them join the drug trade and graduate into prison. This phenomenon is rapidly growing in the white community as well.
So…Obama, Holder and the “old guard” epitomized by Jackson have revitalized the race issue. More’s the pity. The nation deserves better.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
So…this is what it’s come down to after all these years of entitlements, quotas, affirmative action, and thousands of African Americans elected to public office, with many in high-profile government positions and one even elected to the presidency, who last year nominated to the Supreme Court a judge who was in the process of being overturned by the SCOTUS as a federal judge in her decision to deny white people promotions because of their race. Jackson would say that blacks suffer because of racism, but Judge Sotomayor would prove it the other way; however, one dare not call her racist – absolutely politically incorrect.
Jackson, of course, was actually insisting that the government simply does not give blacks enough, his obvious implication being that the result is an unbelievably inordinate number of black men in jail. What on earth is the connection? It’s a lead-pipe cinch that far less than 55% of the jail population in the 1960s was black, when all the entitlements were passed into law. What happened as result of government actions in that amazing decade so fortuitous for blacks?
One is dumbstruck by Jackson’s allusion to public education. In the last reportable school-year, 2006-07, the average amount spent per pupil throughout the U.S. (13% African American) was $9,557. In the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C., 54% black), however, $16,540, or an increase of 73% over the national average, was spent per pupil. Ironically, that school-system, notwithstanding that inordinate expenditure, is probably the worst in the nation.
In D.C. the teacher-to-pupil ratio was 1:13.5 and the average annual teacher salary was $59,000. The national figures were 1:15.5 and $50,816, respectively so teachers in D.C. contend with much smaller classes while having incomes 16% higher than the national average. Most of the students in D.C. are black, 54% as opposed to 13% of the population nationwide, but the Rev. Jackson would have it that the government doesn’t spend enough on black students. This same paradigm is replicated in other large cities such as New York City and Detroit.
Colin Powell was appointed National Security Adviser by Reagan, Joint Chiefs Chairman by George H.W. Bush, and State Secretary by George Bush. Exhibiting his appreciation, Powell went for Obama in the last election. Ms. Rice was appointed National Security Adviser by George Bush and later State Secretary, meaning that the State Department was headed by African Americans for eight successive years.
Apparently, that doesn’t rise to “enough” for Jackson, nor does the election of a black president, who teleprompted his prowess in a speech on 02 August to disabled American veterans regarding the winding down of the Iraqi conflict although he has merely maintained the schedule established by George Bush. While in the Senate, Obama opposed the “surge,” which made the Iraq affair a winner for the U.S. The hypocrisy was apparent.
Race has been becoming a lesser issue in recent years, especially with the appointment and election to office of multitudes of blacks. With the advent of Obama as president should have come a downright death to the race issue. Instead, there’s been a resurgence in the matter of playing the “race card.” Obama’s “typical white person” remark in Philadelphia in 2008 coupled with his description of the “Bible-hugging, rifle-toting crowd on the hunt for Mexicans” in 2008, along with the “cowardice” remark of Attorney General Holder (another high-level black official) have ramped-up the rhetoric anew.
The “heart of the civil rights struggle” has nothing to do with prisons, as Jackson would have it. The heart of the struggle ended with the civil rights laws of the 1960s, which led directly to the near total dissolution of the black family, black men deciding against work and in favor of not being legally responsible for the products of their often indiscriminate impregnating of black women. The resulting welfare-society-permanent-underclass perpetuates itself as its boys with no fathers to guide them join the drug trade and graduate into prison. This phenomenon is rapidly growing in the white community as well.
So…Obama, Holder and the “old guard” epitomized by Jackson have revitalized the race issue. More’s the pity. The nation deserves better.
And so it goes.
Jim Clark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)