By Erik Rush
"Nearly every American liked Christmas a lot, But the far-Left, who lived in self-righteousness, did not!
The Left hated Christmas! The whole Christmas season!
Now, please don’t ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be their heads weren’t screwed on just right.
It could be, perhaps, that their jeans were too tight.
But I think that the most likely reason of all, May have been that their brains were two sizes too small…"
Two thousand years ago, a man was born in Judea (a region of modern-day Israel). During three years of His adult life He preached a social philosophy similar to what many might call "The Golden Rule." He gained a large following and thus was considered a heretic and a threat to the ruling powers. As a result of this, He died to prove the point of his teachings.
Christians believe that in this action He reconciled humanity to God (absolving us of our sins, or that which separates us from God) because He was in fact God incarnate, or an avatar of God, to put it in broader terms; His teachings, the Gospel (or "Good News") was that of the redemption He had come to bring.
Since then, despite the occasional (and occasionally atrocious) subversion and perversion of His teachings brought about by human frailty, we have experienced 2000 years of good works in His name. The ideas and mores to which most in the Western world still adhere were alien concepts in the day of Jesus Christ. Given the brutality and cheapness of human life at the time, people were glad to hear His Message.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Christmas categories at 1:12 AM EST
No Comments »
By Carey Roberts
The Duke lacrosse case represents an enduring failure of the American mainstream media. Not only did the New York Times, CNN, USA Today, and other outlets neglect their duty to provide balanced and factual coverage of the case. Worse, they became the public relations arm of a sleazy prosecutor named Michael Nifong.
As so often happens in rape cases, the media featured lurid accusations made by an anonymous victim, all the while omitting the word "alleged" and failing to offer the defendant the opportunity to present his side of the event.
In the Duke case, it was the Raleigh News and Observer that led the headlong rush to judge. Its March 25, 2006 issue featured a front-page five-column article with the headline: "Dancer Gives Details of Ordeal: A Night of Racial Slurs, Growing Fear, and, Finally, Sexual Violence."
Media sensationalism doesn’t get much worse than that.
The Durham Herald-Sun followed suit, eventually printing more than 300 articles and 20 editorials that savaged the innocent players. Soon a lynch mob atmosphere prevailed on the patrician Duke University campus. [www.ifeminists.net/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.133 ]
So by the time the members of the Duke lacrosse team were formally charged with the gang rape of Crystal Gail Mangum, they found themselves arrayed against a powerful coalition of interest groups and leftist rabble-rousers: the office of the county prosecutor, the Durham Police Department, the media establishment, and the Duke faculty Group of 88.
Extraordinary pressure was placed on the young men to admit to the misdeed. At an early interview a policeman warned Dave Evans, "Tell us the truth or you’re going to jail for the rest of your life." Local feminists organized a rally with signs saying, "Time to Confess." On March 29 a "Please Come Forward" poster with mug shots of the players was posted on campus.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Law Issues categories at 1:05 AM EST
No Comments »
Washington, D.C. - December 11, 2007, Congress passed a resolution by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) to recognize the importance of Christmas and Christianity in America.
The resolution states that “Christmas is a time for 225 million Christians throughout this country to reflect on the birth of their Savior Jesus Christ and it is celebrated as recognition of God’s redemption, mercy and grace.”
This true message of Christmas is under assault in our country as the reins of political correctness try to dictate how Americans can celebrate this holiday. Even secular symbols of Christmas are being attacked. Rep. King’s resolution simply honors the real reason for the Christmas season.
Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America, said, “It is only fitting that Congress recognizes and honors Christmas.
“The celebration of Christmas permeates our entire country as most Americans revel in the joy of the season. We thank Rep. King for introducing this resolution that notes the contributions of Christianity to the establishment of this great nation.”
The Christmas Resolution passed the House by a vote of 372-9 with only Democrats opposing it. Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colorado) was among those who opposed this resolution, yet voted in favor of resolutions earlier this year that recognized other religions. Her office told CWA that the Christmas Resolution blurred the line between separation of church and state.
The other Members who voted against the Christmas Resolution were: Reps. Ackerman (New York), Clarke (New York), Hastings (Florida), Lee (California), McDermott (Washington), Scott (Virginia), Stark (California) and Woolsey (California).
Shari Rendall, Director of Legislation and Public Policy, adds, “It astounds me that any Member of Congress would oppose legislation that recognizes the importance of Christmas in our country, particularly in light of the fact that earlier this year Congress passed two separate resolutions honoring the Hindu and Islamic religions and their respective holidays.
For Information Contact:
Natalie Bell
(202) 488-7000
media.cwfa.org
Posted by Walt in Christianity, Christmas categories at 11:58 PM EST
No Comments »
ADF and allies file lawsuit challenging SB 777
SAN DIEGO — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and Advocates for Faith and Freedom filed a lawsuit Tuesday in federal court to challenge the constitutionality of California Senate Bill 777. The new law redefines a student’s sex as his or her “gender identity,” relying upon a student’s feelings about whether the student is male or female rather than his or her biological sex.
“State officials are jeopardizing women’s privacy and the safety of women and children. Without any standards for determining someone’s ‘gender,’ school officials have no way to prevent a man from using the girl’s restroom or locker room, for example, and this should alarm students and parents,” said ADF Legal Counsel Tim Chandler.
SB 777 prohibits schools from imposing dress codes or segregating school activities and programs on the basis of “gender.” ADF and Advocates attorneys representing California Education Committee, L.L.C., argue that SB 777 is so vague that it could force schools to permit boys to participate in girls’ sports and run for homecoming queen.
In October, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed SB 777 into law to become effective Jan. 1. The law applies to all public schools and most private schools, including pre-schools, elementary schools, high schools, and post-secondary schools, such as colleges and universities.
A copy of the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California in the case California Education Committee v. Brown can be read at www.telladf.org/UserDocs/CECComplaint.pdf.
ADF is a legal alliance defending the right to hear and speak the Truth through strategy, training, funding, and litigation.
www.telladf.org
Posted by Walt in Education categories at 1:14 AM EST
No Comments »
By Warner Todd Huston
Last Sunday, from the pen of editorial page editor of the Seattle Times James Vesely, we got a pretty good indication of why the new media of the Internet is so swiftly taking over the traditional role of the old, dead tree media. One word describes it; arrogance. It is an arrogance of the assumed supremacy of the old media and the air of entitlement that it holds dear. It is the presumption that what they write is "truth," that newspapers are the arbiters of that truth, and that journalists are "democracy" personified and that without them we are naught but a "banana republic." And it is the sneering, discountenance with which they look upon the reading public as the great unwashed that has finally caught up with them. However, some are beginning to notice it and unless the dead tree media realizes this truth staring them in the face, they truly are a doomed industry.
Mr. Vesely wrongly imagines that Americans are not abandoning his beloved, old media in favor of the Internet because of the failed content of the old media. Vesely imagines that people are not "willingly turning from fiber to cyber" as a "replacement of … the methodology of reporting and editing" of the old media. Vesely thinks people are only turning to the Internet because it is faster and more "modern." He imagines that newspapers are "carefully edited" and that they speak truth and, that being true, people can’t possibly be turning away from his fellows because of content.
Here is is deluding himself. People are leaving the dead tree media in droves because they simply do not trust them anymore, their "methodology" has become corrupt and self-serving as well as ideologically homogenized all across the industry offering few avenues for differing opinion.
So, why are newspapers in decline? Amazingly, Vesley seems to imagine that the only reason newspapers are declining in circulation is because they are delivered by "a 13-year-old on a bicycle working after school." He thinks the method of delivery is the only reason the old media is in decline.
But what about that Internet, doohickey, anyway? What does Vesely think of it? It turns out he feels it is all just "opinions" that would "befuddle the finest espionage organization" to figure out. Vesely imagines that the Internet is nothing but "rumor."
Foremost, a decent newspaper is the enemy of rumor and a citizen of its place. Blogs are not the enemy of rumor, nor is talk radio or cable television. Rumor is not the substitute for truth, and it takes journalism to sift for truth.
Talk about clueless.
Yes, Vesely imagines that his beloved newspapers have cornered the market on "truth." At least what "truth" is on any given day, change as it may, because "truth is fleeting," or so he claims.
Reporters know that truth is fleeting, and that it changes in the palm of the hand like mercury. For just a moment, something is true. It is true because it is verifiable by other sources and true because of the checks and counterchecks that look for truth amid the haze of events. It was that verifiable truth that kept newspapers coming to the kitchen table.
No, Mr. Vesely, truth is not "fleeting." Interpretations may be, but truth is fixed in fact. But, this claim that truth is "fleeting" is not one that "journalist’s" even subscribe to because as a rule the "legitimate" media seems to bend all stories to fit their own base line of "truth" grounded in their leftist ideology. So, in the way the media practices journalism, only facts seem fleeting because they change early and often to fit their greater ideological narrative.
This is what the consumer is responding to. People have become acutely aware that the media is lying to them and that they have an agenda that they hide behind a false veneer of "journalistic integrity" and "balanced" reporting. The American public feels they are being badly served by the agenda journalism hidden behind the stoic claims of "truth" presented to them by the traditional media. And, if they are going to get opinion disguised as "reporting" from the old media, the American public would rather go to sources that they understand ahead of time comes from a particular ideological vantage point.
Honesty is what the American public wants and that is in short supply from the traditional media.
Let us deal with this claim that newspapers and journalists are the guardians of truth via the 1st Amendment, anyway. This claim is a self-serving falsity that really has only gained cachet since the 1960s when journalists stopped wanting to be writers and started imagining that their job was to somehow save the world. It also coincided with the star power of TV news when reporters stopped being the faceless voices behind a mic and became the story. Instead of the news read by Walter Cronkite, we got Walter Cronkite with the news. Instead of an on the scene report by Dan Rather we got Dan Rather on the scene.
There was a day when a town would sport several newspapers that were admittedly lined up behind a Party or even a specific candidate — it was plain to see and everyone knew it. In the early Republic, for instance, candidates actually openly printed their own newspapers to support their candidacy. If you wanted Henry Clay of Kentucky for president, for instance, you read his newspaper. If you wanted the argument of your own party affiliation, you could find a newspaper in your own town that presented that opinion to you. But, then came the idealism of the 1960s when journalism suddenly imagined that it was above such partisanship, when journalists began to imagine they were the truth personified. This shift in self perception is what resulted in the demise of the old media.
Vesely is a perfect example of those who imagine he is the arbiter of truth, fooling himself that he has been able to subdue his partisanship and replaced it with a "professional" approach to the news. He feels that there are special "obligations of journalism" making his work above the mere rumor mongering of the Internet and the great unwashed that people it. In this he is not much different from many of his contemporaries in the field. They all imagine they have shed their own partisanship, yet only they think that this is true. Everyone else sees their partisanship on display fairly clearly. Their self-perception is more like self-deception.
Vesely ends his piece with the further claim that, along with being truth itself, his fellows are also somehow the personification of the "democratic state." That without his brand of journalism, there can be no democracy. This is a claim we hear often from the media and it has a small ring of truth to it. But the truth is not exactly as Vesely and his comrades want to imagine it.
Vesely is right on when he says, "Without democracy — which means not just freedom but the robust life in a democratic state — the free press cannot survive, no matter how rich it gets." A free press was one of the most important aspects of our system passed on to us by the brilliance of our founders. It can neither survive without democracy, nor does democracy survive without the free press. They work hand in hand, neither a dispensable facet of the other.
But, here is the step too far that journalists today make. In Vesely’s piece it is an admiring quote from "Today’s Word on Journalism" that serves to illustrate the error that journalists make.
"While the newspaper is expendable, the tradition it represents and the information it supplies are not. The evolution from Gutenberg to Gates may be irreversible, but as new media replace the old ones there’s no official passing of the torch of responsibility, no automatic transfer of the sacred trust the First Amendment placed upon the free press and its proprietors. In fact, the handoff, such as it is, has been fumbled very badly. As newspapers are eviscerated, marginalized and abandoned, they leave a vacuum that nothing and no one is prepared to fill — a crisis on its way to becoming a tragedy. When railroads and riverboats began to go the way of the passenger pigeon, no one was harmed except the work force and a few big investors who had failed to diversify. If professional journalism vanishes along with the newspapers, this thing we call a constitutional democracy becomes a banana republic."
Vesely’s quote is a perfect example of the arrogance inherent in the mindset of the creature who imagines himself a "professional journalist." This quote assumes the perfection and incorruptibility of the right thinking press. It assumes the general "rightness" of the denizens of the modern media culture and that assumption is neither a necessary part of that healthy democratic state, nor does it even exist. There is no "torch of responsibility" for the old media to pass on. A free press does not require "truth," nor is truth the sole jurisdiction of journalists. Nor is "the press" the guardian of the Constitution. In fact, "truth" is a life long search not one that can be supplied by a homogenized press corps all of whom subscribe to the same ideological precepts. The Constitution is ill served by a press that has no diversity in thought.
Even in his day, Thomas Jefferson was considered a Renaissance man. His search for truth was not one of mere years but one of a life time of study. His ideas changed over time as he grew in his understanding of life. Take his thoughts on religion, for instance. Many mistakenly call him a deist today, but one cannot reconcile the harsh things the younger Jefferson said about religion when compared with the warmer feelings he had about the subject as an aged statesman unless one takes into account his changing understanding with age. The older Jefferson said things about religion that would have shocked, maybe even disgusted the younger. Also consider that Ben Franklin once said that we had a Republic if we could keep it. By that he meant to relay to us all that it is the responsibility of each and every citizen to inform himself on what is going on about him so that he might become an informed citizen able to participate fully in the Republican process. So, one simply cannot read a single paper and get "the truth." One must stay informed and take in as many sources of information as possible, then makes one’s own mind up and act accordingly but that is impossible when "the press" all offer the same ideologically tinged "news." Sadly, there is little diversity in opinion for the most part in modern journalism. The number of conservative papers, for instance, is small compared to the nearly universally left leaning filed of journalism.
Now let me make a prescription for the Newspaper industry. If papers want to regain some modicum of their circulation, perhaps they might jettison this absurd claim that they are "balanced" and jump feet first back into the world of raucous opinion and staunch, open and honest advocacy. Bring back the sort of opinion that once existed in the media that has made the Internet the place to be today. If you want to be liberal, be honest in that role. If you want to increase circulation, serve conservatives who are leaving you in droves for talk radio and the Internet.
Above all, your "journalists" out there, come clean. If you want to be a leftist, admit it openly. You aren’t really fooling anyone that you aren’t a leftist, anyway and this subterfuge is the single biggest reason why you are losing the battle for the public’s attention.
After all, no body likes a liar.
Warner Todd Huston is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.
New Media Alliance Television (www.nmatv.com)
New Media Alliance Blogs (www.thenma.org/blogs)
www.therealitycheck.org
Posted by Walt in News Media categories at 11:44 PM EST
No Comments »
By Alan Caruba
I am already quite sick of hearing Democrat candidates say that we have to “improve America’s standing in the world” as if the whole world holds our nation in contempt or disagrees with our actions.
All nations act upon what they believe to be their best interests and those interests are often shaped by their political philosophy. These things are subject to change. For example, there are some 200 sovereign nations in the world. Of these, 120 are multi-party democracies. Compare this with 1970 when there were fewer than 35 nations that were not outright dictatorships or operating under the iron fist of the single party rule of Communism.
One might conclude from this that democracy is catching on around the world and that in this new century most people want some form of representative government for their nation.
This is what inspires Buddhist monks to risk their lives to march against the military dictators in Burma (now Myanmar). This is what provokes outrage in the former Soviet satellite of Georgia when the rule of law is suspended or, most dramatically, when lawyers and judges, along with others, pour into the streets of Pakistan when its president seeks to extend his term in office by declaring an emergency and martial law. It’s thousands of Venezuelans filling the streets to try to stop the dictatorial ambitions of Hugo Chavez.
Where did these nations and people learn about democracy and representative government? For the most part, the United States of America has been both the example and the instrument for the spread of these concepts.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Politics, US Constitution, US Military categories at 6:32 AM EST
No Comments »
By Alan Caruba
“A petition seeking Endangered Species Act protection for a rare loon that breeds in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve has been accepted for review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service” noted a May 29, 2007 Associated Press article. “Conservationists hope an eventual listing of the yellow-billed loon will curb petroleum development in the 23-million acre reserve that covers much of Alaska’s North Slope.”
So, at a time when a $100 barrel of oil makes economies around the world quiver, the “conservationists” are more interested in a yellow-billed loon than in your ability to drive to work, pick up the kids at school, or just go anywhere in your car. Thank you, environmentalists everywhere, thank you for being so obscenely oblivious to reality.
However, yellow-billed loons are not sufficiently illustrative of alleged dangers to species in the frozen North. Polar bears, however, are. Polar bears are the poster children of global warming and we all “know” that all the ice is melting in the Arctic, the bears are drowning or just damn well running out of food because “human activity” is affecting an environment in which they have lived and thrived for millennia.
If you believe such nonsense, let me first remind you that the scientific name for polar bears is “Ursus maritimus”, bespeaking their distinctive ability to swim anywhere they want.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Economics, Environment Issues, Global Warming categories at 6:41 AM EST
No Comments »
By Robert Meyer
Typically any discussion about breaches in the so-called impregnable wall of church and state separation are associated with right-wing fundamentalist Christians. This is a gross misconception, due largely to a deconstruction of the true meaning concerning the church and state separation concept.
The "strict separatist" view of this doctrine has come into vogue, its contemporary roots were ushered in primarily by the Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in the 1947 Everson v. Board of Education. The 1971 Lemon v. Kurtzman ruling gave us the "Lemon Test," further refining and codifying the requirements of the establishment clause to the satisfaction of the then current Supreme Court.
The modern application of this approach yields something almost tantamount to affirmative action for secularists.
This is accomplished by viewing the concept of separation as an ideological separation of the secular and sacred realms, rather than a functional and jurisdictional separation of the two institutions, church and state. A sociopathic conceptual divide between God and government results, rather than a healthy recognition and respect of sphere sovereignty.
We have seen the clever, but irreverent bumper sticker slogan: "The last time we mixed religion and politics people got burned at the stake."
Soviet dissident Alexander Solzhenitsyn would not be impressed. He might reply that the last time a country forgot about God, millions were murdered–and that event happened more recently–in the "enlightened" 20th century. After the liberal makes his political or philosophical dissertation about getting right-wing fundamentalist thinking out of the halls of government, he is ironically ready demonstrate that he doesn’t really believe in church and state separation after all.
We find him asking rhetorical questions, such as, who would Jesus bomb, or how does Bush’s foreign policy square with the Sermon on the Mount? Viola!
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Christianity, Church and State categories at 6:38 AM EST
No Comments »
By Jim Kouri
"I shudder to think how millions of California children will be led astray, how marriage will be destroyed, and how immorality will step on the neck of morality if Arnold Schwarzenegger signs five anti-family bills into law. The ‘Terminator’ has less than two weeks to sign or veto very bad bills!" said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families.
Thomasson is disappointed with California’s Christian pastors and elders. In the last five days, many individuals and several businesses have responded to CCF’s action alert. However, to date, only one church has faxed in veto letters to the liberal Schwarzenegger’s office in Sacramento.
"This is not right, since the majority of pastors in California oppose sexual indoctrination of schoolchildren (SB 777 and AB 394), oppose demeaning marriage (AB 43 and AB 102), and oppose forcing the homosexual-bisexual-transsexual agenda on businesses, organizations, and churches (AB 14)," said Thomasson.
"Distracted drivers cause car accidents; distracted pastors may accidentally assist anti-family bills to be signed into law. The Governor will notice our loud voice or our relative silence. The choice is [ours]," he added.
California’s leading pro-family organizations are urging Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto five bills they believe will harm children, marriage, and religious freedom that are on his desk. And the Governor is taking notice — he’s listed the five bills as among a dozen pieces of legislation upon which telephone callers to his State Capitol office can "vote."
Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), Capitol Resource Institute, California Family Council, and Traditional Values Coalition are all urging vetoes of two school sexual indoctrination bills (SB 777 and AB 394), two marriage-demeaning bills (AB 102 and AB 43), and a bill that forces homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality upon businesses, churches, and nonprofit member organizations such as the Boy Scouts (AB 14).
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Education, Family, Liberalism, Social Issues categories at 12:19 AM EST
No Comments »
By Robert E. Meyer
Recently there has been a celebrated news release, detailing a new breakthrough in stem-cell research, which may make the existing moral controversy over the use of embryonic stem-cells moot.
While it’s still too early to tell if this new procedure using adult stem-cells from skin will produce the anticipated results, I have a feeling those perched exclusively in the embryonic stem-cell research camp, will be left unsatisfied.
The reason for my hunch is the way the stem-cell controversy has been misrepresented all along.
The fact that many religious leaders are tentatively, but enthusiastically, endorsing this new advance, refutes the charge that persons of strong religious convictions are Luddites trying to stifle scientific progress. This is an absurd canard that refuses to die a natural and merciful death.
A second false claim, is that the Bush administration sold out to the "religious-right," when the president banned government funding of embryonic stem-cell research several years ago.
Bush actually took the middle ground of compromise. Bush did not ban embryonic stem-cell research that was privately funded, nor prohibit continued research on the stem-cell lines already existing. To do so would have been the more socially conservative position. Bush’s "concessions" were viewed by some as his lack conservative conviction.
Of course, many will argue that embryos are routinely discarded as a byproduct of fertility treatments. I am personally opposed to that aspect of fertility procedures. Yet, the point of criticizing Bush because of that situation is irrelevant, because the government does not fund in vitro fertilization therapy. Thus, Bush is perfectly consistent in his approach, even if he is found to be wrong in his ultimate conclusions.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted by Walt in Health, Religon, Science categories at 11:15 PM EST
No Comments »
