Thursday, March 31, 2005

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

George Felos

I told you he was weird...

Saturday, March 26, 2005

Friday, March 25, 2005

Good Friday

These seven verses are called "The Seven Last Words," or "The Seven Cries from the Cross." They represent the seven last things Jesus said before his death on the cross:

Matthew 27:46
Luke 23:34
Luke 23:43
John 19:26-27
John 19:28
John 19:30
Luke 23:46

I encourage you to look up each one and read it today as your meditation on this Good Friday, the day we remember what Jesus Christ did for us on the cross.

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

12 Step Program

OVERCOMING LIBERALISM -- A 12-STEP PROGRAM

Step 1 -- Admitting You're A Liberal This is the first step for every liberal on the way to recovery. It is important to understand that you're not "progressive," "moderate," or"enlightened." You're a liberal, and you need to be honest with yourself about that fact.

Step 2 -- Pledge To Support Your Beliefs With Facts Realize that truth is more important than moral superiority and is the onlyway to come over to reality. You must research beyond propaganda from theSierra Club, Hilllary Clinton, and CNN to understand things as they really exist in the world. You can no longer argue based on "feelings" or emotion. You will actually need to back up your arguments with real information. This is a difficult step, because it means you can't be lazyany more.

Step 3 -- Love America This may be the most difficult step for those of you who are hippies andpeaceniks. Admitting that the country you hate actually stands as a beaconto defend freedom throughout the world can make some of you physically ill.You might want to make a visit to a military cemetery to better understandthat these men and women gave their lives so that you could spew hatred. Otherwise, you would currently be living in a police state that would neverlet you wear that nasty patchouli oil, let alone speak out against yourgovernment.

Step 4 -- Take A College Level Economics Class A Socialist is defined as someone who's never taken an economics class.Most Socialists have a hard time balancing their checkbooks, let aloneexplaining the simple concept of supply-and-demand. It's time to flush your complete ignorance of basic economics down the toilet and understand how the world actually functions. This concept will be very important forthe next steps that involve communism, facts about corporations, and the inefficiencies of government.

Step 5 -- Say "No" To Communism And Socialism While this concept is obvious to most of the free world, it is an importantstep in your recovery process. If you have difficulty with this step,spend a week living and working in Cuba.

Step 6 -- Corporations Are Not Evil If you're reading this article on-line or in an email, it's thanks to corporations. If you get some kind of paycheck, you can thank corporations. If you work for a nonprofit or the government, you still have to thank corporations. The nonprofit sector and the government wouldn't have any money to pay you without corporations. It is also important that you understand that making a profit doesn't equate to"greed" or exploitation. Capitalism has created the greatest society in our world's history. Even communist countries need corporations to survive, so enjoy a nice, hot cup of reality.

Step 7 -- The Government Is Inefficient If you are one of those liberals who believe the government should tax us more in order to take care of society, you need to pay special attention to this step. You need to realize that government bureaucracy will waste most of your tax dollars, while the private sector will put your money to much better use. Even most Democrat politicians understand this to some degree,which is why Hillary's socialist healthcare proposal was voted down by a majority of both Democrats and Republicans. Go to your local post office or call the IRS to ask a tax question if you need a reminder about government inefficiency.

Step 8 -- The Earth Is Not Your "Mother," And She's Not Dying The time has now come to stop your donations to Greenpeace, The SierraClub, and every other EnviroNazi organization to which you belong. Face the reality that the earth, society and our environment are better off today than ever in recorded history and that they are continuing to improve. I realize that many of you tree huggers will have a very difficult time letting go of the Douglas Fir on this one. I would sugges treading The Skeptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg. Mr. Lomborg is a former member of Greenpeace and is currently a statistics professor at a university in Denmark. He set out to prove the world was in bad shape and ended up surprising himself by proving the exact opposite.

Step 9 -- Stop Smoking The Wacky Tobacco Okay, some of you might need to enter another 12-step program to complete this step. Marijuana is distorting your sense of reality, and you need to stop using it. Besides, you'll save a fortune on snacks.

Step 10 -- Eat A Hamburger If God didn't intend for us to eat animals, he wouldn't have made them out of meat. You can put your sprouts and tofu on the hamburger, but get some meat into you. You'll look and feel better than you ever imagined. You can always remind yourself that Nazi propaganda hailed Adolf Hitler as avegetarian to get you through this step.

Step 11 -- Stop Re-writing Political HistoryIt's now time to admit that Bill Clinton is a lying-cheating-sexist-racist-rapist jackass, Hillary Clinton is one of the worst role models for women in this country, Al Gore really did lose the2000 election by every vote tabulation you attempt, Ronald Reagan ended theCold War and didn't create the homeless problem, John McCain is not a typical Republican, and Jimmy Carter is a nice man but has one of the worst presidential records of anyone in history.

Step 12 -- Be A Missionary Once you have completed the previous steps to overcoming liberalism, it'stime for you to share this awakening with others who are not as fortunate.Go out amongst the liberal sheep and spread the good word of your freedom from the chains of ignorance that once bound you.

Congratulations, and welcome to reality.

Sunday, March 20, 2005

Starvation

Wonder if any of them would like to test out their theory...

Saturday, March 19, 2005

Friday, March 18, 2005

A Sad Day

A win for the culture of death....

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

A Win For W

"Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush."

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Joe Lieberman

Democrats are targeting him....

WMD

NY Times: Iraq Had WMD 'Stockpiles' in 2003

In a stunning about-face, the New York Times reported Sunday that when the U.S. attacked Iraq in March 2003, Saddam Hussein possessed "stockpiles of monitored chemicals and materials," as well as sophisticated equipment to manufacture nuclear and biological weapons, which was removed to "a neighboring state" before the U.S. could secure the weapons sites.

From Newsmax

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Democrat Humor

My liberal co-worker sent me this link...It's funny. (We all know GWB can mangle his words at times.)

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Tuesday, March 08, 2005

Republican Humor

One day a florist goes to a barber for a haircut. After the cut he asked about his bill and the barber replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week” The florist is pleased and leaves the shop. Next morning when the barber goes to open up, there is a thank you card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.

Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The cop is happy and leaves the shop. Next morning when the barber goes to open up, there is a thank you card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.

Later a Republican comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The Republican is very happy and leaves the shop! Next morning when the barber goes to open up, there is a thank you card and a dozen different books such as “How to Improve your Business” and “Becoming More Successful".

Then a Democrat comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I’m sorry, I cannot accept money from you; “I'm doing community service this week." The Democrat is very happy and leaves the shop. Next morning when the barber goes to open up, there are a dozen Democrats lined up waiting for a free haircut.

Monday, March 07, 2005

Birthday Gifts

Once upon a time, a Sultan was blessed with the birth of a son after years of hoping. The boy immediately became the apple of his father's eye. Just before his son's sixth birthday, the Sultan said to him, "Son, I love you very much. Your birthday is coming soon. What would you like?"

His son replied, "Daddy, I would like to have my own airplane." His father bought him American Airlines. Just before his son's seventh birthday, the Sultan said, "Son, you are my pride and joy. Ask what you want for your birthday. Whatever it is, it's yours."

His son replied, "Daddy, I would like a boat." His father bought him the Princess Cruise Line. Just before his son's eighth birthday the Sultan said, "Son, you bring so much happiness into my life. Anything you want, I shall get for you." His son replied, "Daddy, I would like to be able to watch cartoons."

His father bought him Disney Studios. Just before his son's ninth birthday, the Sultan said, "Son, you are my life. Your birthday is coming soon. Ask what you wish. I will get it for you." His son, who had grown to love Disney, replied, "Daddy, I would like a Mickey Mouse outfit and a Goofy outfit." His father bought him the Democratic Party and CBS news.

Sunday, March 06, 2005

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Judicial Supremacists and the Despotic Branch

The U.S. Constitution suffered some serious setbacks this week. The future of liberty and the rule of law suffered likewise. It's bad enough that Democrat obstructionists are once again denying President George Bush's federal-bench nominees their constitutionally prescribed up-or-down vote by the full Senate. In a fine example of why we need those nominees on the bench, Leftists on the Supreme Court are, again, "interpreting" the so-called "living Constitution" as a method of altering that venerable document by judicial diktat.Worse yet, these Left-judiciary Supremacists -- Justice Anthony Kennedy and Court Jesters Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, David Souter and John Paul Stevens -- cited "national consensus" as a factor in Tuesday's Roper v. Simmons ruling.

In other words, they disregarded theConstitution's prescription for federalism and republican government in the name of unmitigated democracy. Which is to say, while riding roughshod over the Ninth and Tenth Amendments as they overturned the laws of 19 states, the Supremes blithely pushed the nation one step closer toward what everyone since Plato has described as governance in its most degenerative form.Writing for the majority, Kennedy claimed that Americans had reached a"national consensus" against capital punishment for "children," citing as evidence that only 20 states allow a 17-year-old to be sentenced to death. Of course, Kennedy's logic is utterly at odds with decisions such as Roe v. Wade. In that 1973 decision, the Supremes serendipitously discovered a right to privacy that allowed for the aborting of children, despite the fact that all 50 states had laws at the time either prohibiting or tightly regulating abortion. So we must ask you, Justice Kennedy -- what's all this rubbish about a "national consensus?"

You recall, of course, that in a recent case, the Supremacists discovered a clause in the Constitution specifically stating that a 14-year-old is mature enough to abort the life of her child without parental consent. Now, in Roper v. Simmons, they've found a contradictory clause, which avers that a 17-year-old is not mature enough to be held accountable for capital murder. Adding grievous insult to this "national consensus" injury, Kennedy cited "international consensus" noting "the overwhelming weight of international opinion" as a factor in the Court's decision. Kennedy cited the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child when writing, "The United States is the only country in the world that continues to give official sanction to the juvenile death penalty." Here, his message was all too clear: The High Court is building a tradition of referring"to the laws of other countries and to international authorities as instructive for its interpretation" of the U.S. Constitution.

Sadly, such citing of international standards and conventions seems tobe the latest fashion among the Supremacists.In 2003, Justices Ginsburg and Breyer upheld an affirmative-action policy at the University of Michigan, noting an international treat yendorsing race-based advancement for minorities. Stevens, for his part, cited international law in overturning another capital case: "Within the world community, the...death penalty...is overwhelmingly disapproved." Furthermore, in Lawrence v. Texas, Kennedy wrote that the European Court of Human Rights has affirmed the "rights of homosexua ladults to engage in intimate, consensual conduct."

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said recently, "I suspect that over time we will rely increasingly...on international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues." Justice Breyer added, "We see all the time, Justice O'Connor and I, and the others, how the world really -- it's trite but it's true -- is growing together. The challenge [will be] whether our Constitution...fits into the governing documents of other nations.""How our Constitution fits?"Justice Antonin Scalia, a dependable constitutional constructionist, protested on behalf of the dissenters that capital punishment should, rightly in accordance with constitutional federalism, be determinedby individual states.

"Because I do not believe that the meaning of our Eighth Amendment, any more than the meaning of other provisions of our Constitution, should be determined by the subjective views of five Members of this Court and like-minded foreigners, I dissent. ... To invoke alien law when it agrees with one's own thinking, and ignore it otherwise, is not reasoned decision-making, but sophistry." Just so. Perhaps Justice Scalia recalls this admonition from Founder GeorgeWashington:

"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence...the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government."Clearly, international consensus has no standing whatsoever in the constitutional rule of law in the United States. For that matter, the only relevant "national consensus" is that prescribed by our Constitution for its amendment -- a consensus of the people as represented by two-thirds of the legislatures of the several states. But such facts are lost on Left-judicial activists who are content to legislate from the bench. Just consider this recent comment from Justice Breyer:"The extent to which the Constitution is flexible is a function of what provisions you're talking about." In other words, if he likes it the way it was written, it stands as is. If not, he interprets it, in the words of the august Sen. Sam Ervin, "to mean what it would have said if he, instead of the Founding Fathers, had written it."

Which brings us to the Senate Judiciary Democrats' filibuster ofPresident Bush's nominees. Plainly, the Constitution intended that Executive Branch appointments be subject to confirmation by the full Senate, and that such consideration not be obstructed by a handful of wild-eyed Leftists such as Ted Kennedy.Why are Senate Democrats so insistent on blocking the President's nominations? Because they know the real locus of central government power resides on the federal bench. Many of President Bush's nominees are constitutional constructionists, as intended by our Founders -- those who issue rulings based on the letter of constitutional law rather than interpret it according to their constituent agenda. Yet Kennedy and his ilk are bent on denying consideration of these fine constructionist judges, for they know that the President will likely advance the names of two such nominees to the Supreme Court in this term. As for the constitutionality of their filibuster, even liberal Georgetown law professor Susan Low Bloch argues that supermajority requirements (to overcome the filibuster) for nominations "upset the carefully crafted rules concerning appointment of both executive officials andjudges and...unilaterally limit the power the Constitution gives to the President in the appointments process.

This [allows] the Senate to aggrandize its own role and would unconstitutionally distort the balance of powers established by the Constitution." Clearly, then, filibuster as a method for obstruction of Senate judicial confirmations circumvents the Constitution in both letter and spirit. That has prompted Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to consider what he calls the "nuclear option" -- change the Senate rules on such committeeobstructions in order to get the President's nominees before the full Senate for an up or down vote -- as constitutionally mandated. In fact, it is the Democrats who have exercised the "nuclear option"by circumventing the Constitution!

So what does the Constitution actually prescribe with regard to federalism and the conduct of federal judges, including the Supremes?The Federalist Papers constitute the definitive explication of our national Constitution. In Federalist No. 32 Alexander Hamilton writes,"[T]here is not a syllable in the [Constitution] which directly empowers the national courts to construe the laws according to the spirit of theConstitution, or which gives them any greater latitude in this respect than may be claimed by the courts of every State." On the subject of federalism, he wrote in No. 81 "...the plan of the [Constitutional]convention aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all the rights of sovereignty which they before had, and which were not, by that act, exclusively delegated to the United States."

In Federalist No. 45, the author of our Constitution, James Madison, notes: "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation and foreign commerce. ... The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives and liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State."

Madison's outline notwithstanding, the scope of activities of the legislative and judicial branches today hardly resemble the limits of our Constitution -- yet nothing in its amendments allows that scope. Concerned for the potential tyranny of the judiciary, Thomas Jefferson warned: "The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch. ... The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please. ... It has long, however, been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression...that the germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal Judiciary; working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief, over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped."

Jefferson continued: "At the establishment of our constitutions, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance."Some 200 years later, they are as dangerous as ever.

Notes JusticeScalia, "As long as judges tinker with the Constitution to 'do what the
people want,' instead of what the document actually commands, politicians who pick and confirm new federal judges will naturally want only thosewho agree with them politically."The time is long overdue for Congress to make amends for failing to check the unbalanced and growing powers being arrogated by these judicial tyrants -- and altering the Senate rules is a good start. But our current circumstances are worse than nearly all analysts are admitting. Not only should these moderate-conservative Bush judicial nominees be seated, but those judges who are in violation of their oaths of office should be unseated by impeachment.

Alas, as Jefferson noted long ago,"We have...[required] a vote of two-thirds in one of the Houses for removing a judge; a vote so impossible where any defense is made before men of ordinary prejudices and passions, that our judges are effectually independent of the nation. ... For experience has already shown that the impeachment it has provided is not even a scare-crow."

From the Federalist Patriot

Tuesday, March 01, 2005

The Cost of Promiscuity

America's Health Burden From Sex Three Times Higher Than Others

Americans suffer from negative health effects brought on by their sexual conduct at a rate that is three times higher than other economically advanced countries according to a study published in SexuallyTransmitted Infections. The study, "Sexual behaviour: related adverse health burden in the United States," is unique because it measures the health ramifications of sexual conduct by counting not only death and diseases but by examining other adverse health affects related to sex.

Using data from 1998, the study found that 7.5 percent of Americans suffered a negative health incident resulting from sexual activity andthat 1.3 percent of all deaths in America can be attributed to sexual behavior.

The study notes that previous efforts to measure the health effects of sexual activity did not go far enough and failed to take into consideration all the ways in which quality of life can be diminished by promiscuity. According to the report, "Measuring adverse outcomes of reproduction or sexual behaviour by counting deaths or diseases alone is inadequate for a proper understanding of the dimensions of the issue. Many such adverse outcomes occur at a young age leading to a large component of lifespan lived with disability. Many deaths from such adverse outcomes occur at a young age and such loss of productive life is not captured bymortality statistics."

Among the illnesses brought on by sexual behavior that are lethal for men, HIV is far and away the largest killer. There were 36,000 incidences of the virus in 1998 and 18,221 deaths accounting for 93 percent of all deaths of men from sexual behavior. For women, 8,200 contracted HIV and4,234 died of it making it second to cervical cancer, which took the lives of 4,921 women, as the biggest killer of women.

The study also calculated the Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALY)cost for illnesses brought on by sexual behavior. DALY is a number that combines into a single measurement the loss of healthy years of life from an illness and the years of life cut short by premature death from an illness. While total deaths caused by sexual behavior for both men andwomen were 29,782, the total cost in Disability Adjusted Life Years was more than 2 million. The study noted that its data "included more unsafe sex related conditions than were considered in previous analyses for theUnited States" including "hepatitis, infertility," damage to men's reproductive capabilities, "maternal conditions, and abortions."

Though it was not listed among the study's prominent findings, women's fertility takes a huge hit. There were 598,000 annual incidences of infertility resulting from sexual behavior leading to a cost in Disability Adjusted Life Years of 843,747. In fact, infertility produced the highest DALY cost of any of the negative health effects of sexual activity.

Beyond the toll of HIV - which had a DALY cost for men of 557,021 -men were hit especially hard by the Hepatitis B virus. With more than 1.5million incidences of the virus among men the DALY cost came to 279,624.

Copyright 2005---Culture of Life Foundation. Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required. Culture of Life Foundation1413 K Street, NW, Suite 1000Washington DC 20005Phone: (202) 289-2500 Fax: (202) 289-2502E-mail: clf@culture-of-life.org
Website: http://www.culture-of-life.org