My blog shares ideas regarding Sociology,Conservative Politics, Catholic beliefs, current events, personal stories, Philosophy, humor and entertainment news.
A story broke recently claiming that former President Clinton had lost the "biscuit" -the card bearing the nuclear codes- for months. What utter incompetence!! I guess this is yet another consequence surfacing due to Clinton screwing around with Monica Lewinsky.
While writing on charitable discourse it seems that Conor Friedersdorf manages to be uncharitable toward others with whom he disagrees. While I disagree with pretty much all of his assessments and assumptions of conservative pundits his ideas on charitable discourse seem interesting.
I believe that approaching things in a charitable manner and thus engaging those with whom we both agree or disagree using charitable discourse is the right thing to do, good and prudent. But, if a person comes along and makes outlandish statements and assumptions about your motives instead of debating using facts then one may not be able to be charitable. Should a person base his charitableness in public discourse on the basis of one’s education, knowledge on a subject, gender or political ideology? Does having a college degree make you smarter or more knowledgeable? Does having a higher college degree give someone the right to think that they are better or smarter than you? Are we susceptible as human beings to be more charitable to those we agree with? How come some that have called for charitable public discourse seem to only follow that rule with those with whom they agree, those who are anonymous, or those who they have never met but treat people they have met and know harshly? There can be tough debate while being charitable at the same time. The moderator or blog owner need to be fair and consistent with regards to what comments he/she deems to be inappropriate. Can one’s political ideology blind them to the truth in recognizing evil in the world or when there is one or more threats on the American people?
In most cases even though I am upfront and use a direct approach with what I state on my blog I try to be charitable. But, if a person (usually liberal) appears on my blog and makes ad hominem attacks or outrageous statements then, for me being charitable goes out the window.
For some reason I can't get the video to load so above are two links to the video.
This is the second time that a League of Women Voters moderator has tried to deny the audience from saying the Pledge of Allegiance when requested before a debate. This is also the second time the audience stood up and said the Pledge, making sure the Pledge would be said, before the debate. Tim Murphy is actually my Representative and is a conservative.
It is time to defund NPR. NPR is clearly no longer a reliable source for objective news (and hasn't been for years). NPR is clearly bought and paid for by the leftist radical George Soros.
First, there was Climategate and now there is Wikipropaganda. Apparently, one of the top global alarmist gurus, William Connelly, along with other global warming alarmists had squelched dissenting science. Wikipedia admitted that it had been hijacked by global warming alarmists so now a group of Wikipedia arbitrators have banned William Connelly from participating in any discussion, article, or forum dealing with global warming. "They also banned other posters who had turned Wikipedia into their global warming propaganda outlet."
"Mr. Connolley is a former Green Party candidate for local political office and until 2007 was a climate modeler for the British Antarctic Survey. He is also a missionary for the view that humans cause global warming, and over the years he used his power as an "administrator" on Wikipedia to rewrite the site's global warming articles. He celebrated such controversial scientists as Penn State's Michael Mann, of Climategate fame, and he presented even disputed global warming science as fact. He routinely deleted entries that presented competing views and barred contributors with whom he disagreed. He also smeared scientific skeptics by rewriting their online biographies."
Since Connolley and other global warming alarmists used their positions to enlist a one-sided campaign to exclude differing evidentiary science or publications by dissenters I agree with the decision made by seven dispute arbitrators to ban Connolley and other global warming alarmists from participating in any forums or discussions on global warming.
Since October 19th Missy Smith, the Congressional candidate in Washington D.C., has been running a pro-life television ad campaign, running ads on major networks and on popular shows, which show pictures of aborted babies. And, from October 20th through October 22nd her pro-life ads will be airing on the following shows: Oprah, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, and Seinfeld.
The White House is escalating its assault on corporate political donors, claiming that Democrats merely favor "disclosure." To understand their real goal, consider what happened to Target Corp. when it exercised its First Amendment rights in Minnesota.
In July, the superstore retailer based in Minneapolis donated $150,000 to an independent group called MN Forward, which used the funds to support the primary candidacy of Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Emmer. Consistent with Target's interest, the donation helped pay for an ad highlighting Mr. Emmer's positions on taxes and spending, issues relevant to the state's business climate. Because Mr. Emmer was also a critic of gay marriage, however, within weeks the retailer found itself on the national left's political hit list.
MoveOn.org led the attack, organizing a petition and crafting a TV ad telling shoppers to boycott the chain. Soliciting donations to the anti-Target crusade, MoveOn warned that "Target became one of the first corporations to take advantage of the Citizens United decision when it donated to a far-right candidate for governor in Minnesota." It added, "If we don't fight back, this will be just the tip of the iceberg." Citizen's United is the January Supreme Court decision that said unions and companies can donate to independent political groups, which is what Target did. CONTINUED
Bill O'Reilly speaks the truth about a majority of Americans saying that it is inappropriate for the Ground Zero Mosque to be built so close to Ground Zero and that the mosque should be moved further away from Ground Zero, from where Muslim extremists murdered 3000 innocents on 9/11. The CNN survey shows that 68% of Americans oppose where the Ground Zero Mosque is planned to be built. It is only the left wing fringe cooks that think it is appropriate to have this mosque built a stone's throw away from where Muslim terrorists murdered 3000 innocents in the name of Allah, and Islam. The Imam claims to want to "build bridges" with the public which consists primarily of non-Muslims while both his actions and words are ticking off the public with his willful ignorance, and somewhat threatening statement in the CNN interview if it isn't built where he and other Muslims want it. Gee... the Muslim Imam seems to be having a temper tantrum because his so called goal of "building bridges" and having the mosque built exactly where he and other extremists Muslims want it isn't going as planned. If the mosque isn't built in the exact spot that Muslims want it then it won't be considered a victory mosque. If this is any sign of how "peaceful" he is then God help us. The man is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
There has been much controversy surrounding the closing and sale of three Catholic hospitals in Scranton, Pa. The controversy includes: Kevin Cook - Mercy Health Partners CEO, three different statements, two Catholic Representatives, the Affordable Care Act - A.K.A. - Obamacare, and Obama’s nun.
- In Review
Sr. Carol Keehan, Obama’s nun, is the nun who dissented from Bishops and threw her weight to support Obamacare. She is the nun who used her clout as head of the CHA, falsely claimed that abortion wasn’t covered in Obamacare, and provided “legitimacy” for Bart Stupak and the rest of the so called pro-life Democrats to support and vote for Obamacare even though there were and still are no safeguards protecting against abortion coverage and federal funding in Obamacare. The Congressional Research Report Confirms this. She wanted us, as Catholics to trust our government over our Bishops’ prudential judgment on a matter related to morals. That sounds so nonsensical. Misplaced trust?
For anyone to think that our government is going to do the right thing in matters of faith and morals, look out for you and me, is complete and utter naivete when our government has sanctioned the murders of countless innocents since Roe v. Wade was enacted in 1973.
When Sr. Carol Keehan became a religious sister she took a vow of obedience and in fact has more of an obligation than ordinary laity to heed the Bishops’ prudential judgment with relation to abortion and Obamacare. Since the Church Teaching is that abortion is an intrinsic evil is Catholic Dogma has Sr. Keehan broken her vow of obedience by dissenting from the Bishops in order to support Obamacare?
The common good must not be pursued at the expense of the morally reprehensible murders of innocent human lives.
In his first statement Kevin Cook stated, "Health care reform is absolutely playing a role. Was it the precipitating factor in this decision? No, but was it a factor in our planning over the next five years? Absolutely."
Notice that Cook stated “absolutely” twice.
48 hours later Cook said, sale discussions were happening "long before the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The decision was due to many factors."
Perhaps, there was something occurring behind the scenes?
That same day Sr. Carol Keehan made this statement, "Reports that health reform is the primary motive behind the sale are completely false, misleading and politically motivated. Deliberations to sell the facilities began well before the Affordable Care Act became law and did not hinge on enactment of the legislation."
Okay… Like she isn’t politically motivated to ensure her support for Obamacare isn’t for naught.
Then about a couple days later Cook announced: “Mercy Health Partners recently announced our intention to explore the sale of our facilities in Northeastern Pennsylvania. The rationale for our initiative has been mischaracterized by certain politicized media outlets and severely distorted by some special interest groups.”
Coincidental? Or Coordinated?
Perhaps, there was something occurring behind the scenes?
Would a social justice political activist nun misuse her power as CEO of the CHA to silence the truth in both instances, with Obamacare and with Obamacare playing a pivotal role in the closings of three Catholic hospitals? Did this Left wing activist nun “lower the boom” on Kevin Cook and force him to change his tune in those last two statements? Well, it kinda looks that way.
Oh - how could one forget? Since she bucked both the Bishops and the Catholic faith and instead staunchly supported Obama and his health care bill she was rewarded with one of the 21 pens that Obama used to signed the health care law. What a trade -- fidelity to Church teaching and to her vows sacrificed for fame, power, recognition, and on top of all that, a pen.
From The American Spectator - “One doctor in Scranton -- who was deeply disturbed by the announcement -- is certain he knows the answer. That answer? Mr. Cook was absolutely right the very first time he spoke to WNEP on camera. Hospitals, said this doctor -- frequently run a debt. "What's different? Why now?" he said in terms of the rationale for selling the Mercy hospitals. The reason is exactly as CEO Cook originally said it was. ObamaCare cuts in Medicare reimbursement have changed the rules so drastically for hospitals "you [Mercy Health Partners] are in an untenable situation," said this physician. Most hospitals have accumulating debt because of capital investments, says the doctor. But they can't deal with that debt if in fact their ability to earn money is cut off or drastically reduced over time.
Alarmingly, the doctor, with a lifetime of practice in hand, says that "hospitals close in clusters where there is decreased income in terms of relatively low Medicare reimbursement…because they are the most vulnerable." He adds that what is happening in Scranton, Nanticoke, and Tunkhannock with the Mercy hospitals "is just the beginning. It will happen everywhere because reimbursements will be reduced" under ObamaCare. Particularly, he adds, in areas where you have a high elderly population.”
‘The explosion, all recent with its implications of White House pressure and lost Catholic hospitals, is about to bring in media ads from CatholicVote.org. Says Communications Director Joshua Mercer: "Paul Kanjorski and Chris Carney are Catholic and they both voted for ObamaCare." Citing the sale of the three Mercy hospitals, Mercer says that the pro-ObamaCare votes of the two "has had a real impact on the community." Mercer added a sentiment voiced as well by the Scranton doctor: "There are a lot of Kevin Cooks across the country…the CEO's of small Catholic hospitals are all facing the same realities of more [ObamaCare] mandates and regulations.”’
Seems like there is something fishy going on. I live in Pennsylvania, but unfortunately I don’t live in either of their districts, otherwise I would vote for the opposition.
Here is the political ad that CatholicVote.org has put out.
David Guggenheim, the producer of An Inconvenient Truth, is bucking the Democratic Party when it comes to teachers' unions, and the educational system. Guggenheim is for charter schools and is making a plea for more charter schools with his new film, Waiting For Superman. He is also a member of Democrats for school choice. He has decided to put childrens' education first, before the welfare of the teachers' unions. This man should be commended for standing up for our kids' education and for not following lock step with the Democratic Party.
Here is a review of Waiting For Superman.
David Guggenheim, the man behind An Inconvenient Truth and Obama’s 2008 DNC bio-infomercial, has just released another film — this one a stabbing indictment of teachers’ unions and a plea for more charter schools, titled Waiting for Superman. Democrats for School Choice hosted an advance screening of the documentary, to which black clergy, New York City education chancellor Joel Klein, and National Review were invited. The school-choice cause evidently transcends traditional ideological boundaries.
Waiting for Superman intends to influence policy, yet its narrative follows not politicians, but five children. Bianca, Daisy, Emily, Anthony, and Francisco come from diverse locales — Harlem, L.A., Silicon Valley, D.C., and the Bronx — and are black, Hispanic, and white, but they share the same basic problem: Each is consigned by geography to an inadequate public school. Each wants a choice.
The stories — of Bianca, whose single black mother struggles to afford parochial school but misses the final payment that would let Bianca attend graduation, and of Anthony, who carries a picture of his dead, drug-using father as he seeks a spot at a rare charter boarding school that might keep him away from the streets, to name two — are heartbreaking. But the real message of the movie is revealed in the scenes of the adults who produce this heartbreak. Superman’s most memorable episode is the cartoon illustration of the “lemon dance,” in which school principals waltz their “lemons” (teachers who just can’t teach but can’t be fired) from school to school. The musical number would be hilarious if it weren’t so devastating. So, too, for the shots of the infamous “rubber rooms,” where middle-aged teachers sit in school kids’ chairs, playing cards or laying their heads on their desks to sleep, collecting full pay and pensions.
Guggenheim chooses one champion and one villainess. Michelle Rhee, the chancellor of D.C. schools, is energetic and assertive. She bluntly admits that D.C. students “are getting a crappy education right now,” she fires a couple hundred incompetent educators, institutes some incentive pay, and starts to turn D.C.’s schools around. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), and Rhee’s foil, is on the defensive. She seems most solicitous about the egos of teachers; a speech to her union culminates in the cry, “You are heroes!” In her interviews, Weingarten reminds us what good-hearted people teachers are, and condemns school-choice advocates for demonizing teachers. She has maintained this pattern off-screen as well. “It’s in vogue to bash teachers and unions rather than celebrate the work they do to help kids,” she said, responding to Superman. “That being said, I’m a big girl.”
The haunting portrait of a young, disfigured Afghan woman on Time magazine's cover this summer issued a stark reminder that the stakes in Afghanistan are high -- and that the consequences of failure are brutal, especially for women.
On Friday I met with Bibi Aisha in California, where, thanks to the compassion of many individuals and organizations, she is receiving reconstructive surgery and beginning the long road of healing. The visible scars of her disfigurement will heal with time, but moving beyond the emotional and psychological trauma of her torturous mutilation may be more difficult.
Bibi Aisha's story and the prevalence of intimidation and violence against Afghan women raise important questions for those working to establish this young democracy. Will Afghanistan embrace and protect the rights of all people? Or will it be a nation that allows the oppression of women to continue unabated?
These questions are central to the challenges confronting those who seek peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan today.
Nine years ago, many around the world learned of the severe repression and brutality against women that was common in Afghanistan under the Taliban. Girls were forbidden to attend school. Women were imprisoned in their homes and denied access to doctors when they were sick. And Afghanistan had the highest infant and maternal mortality rates in the world.
Today there are encouraging signs of progress: More than 6.2 million students are enrolled in Afghanistan's schools, and 35 percent of them are girls. Afghan women serve as government ministers and lead as provincial governors. Women have been elected or appointed to the National Assembly. Afghan women work as entrepreneurs, educators, lawyers and community health workers. And their work is essential to the growth of the Afghan economy.
Yet serious challenges remain. A culture of fear still silences women. In many rural areas, those who dare to teach receive letters threatening not only their own lives but their children's as well. And though the Afghan constitution guarantees 25 percent of seats in parliament to female legislators, assassinations of prominent women have driven many from public life. Among those who remain, many are muted by fear.
Since I have started working again I have noticed that I really just don't have the energy or time to post a long list of links for my Eagle Freedom Links so from now on I will be posting mini versions of Eagle Freedom Links either every day or every other day. This will also allow me to highlight more than one blog post for each blogger. Plus, I would like to start highlighting one new blog every couple days or so, so if you know of a good blog that I don't follow I would really appreciate you emailing of new blogs to follow. Thank you.
The video is seen as objectionable by Youtube and was taken down. This is unconscionable!!! What is wrong, is what the security people at the Alaska fair did - violating a man's right to freedom of speech and brutalizing him. We need to stand with this man, stand up for him because you never know whose free speech rights are going to be violated next. Youtube is covering up for the Security at the Fair. Youtube seems to be collaborating in a coverup to silence and violate this man's freedom of speech. Shame on Youtube!! America is the home of the brave and the land of the free. At least that is what America is supposed to be. But, since Obama was elected our freedoms and liberties have been deteriorating over the past two years. We must stop these violations of our freedoms and liberties and reverse course. Let us restore honor to America. Let us continue to fight to restore freedom and liberty to all Americans.
The Media Research Center has started a campaign called Tell The Truth, which has trucks that say “Stop the Liberal Bias, Tell the Truth!” circling the Manhattan headquarters of ABC, CBS, NBC, and the New York Times. This is great! A loud and clear message needs to be sent to these liberal propagandists who claim to be running news organizations. Hooray for Brent Bozell!!! News organizations need to simply tell us the news without giving us their biased opinions in favor of this administration's policies. They simply need to relay the facts to the viewers and then let the viewers decide what to believe, instead of trying to persuade the viewer to agree with their opinions on the various topics and controversies.
The billboard trucks in Manhattan says: “Hey CBS, Stop the Liberal Bias, Tell the Truth!” and the back of the truck says, “Honk If You Don’t Believe The Liberal Media.” The other trucks bear the same message but directed at ABC, NBC, and the New York Times.
"Similar trucks also are operating in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, passing the offices of the broadcast networks, the Washington Post, CNN, the Newseum, the National Press Club and Politico, and ads about the campaign are running on numerous Web sites and on conservative talk radio programs."
'L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center (MRC), the parent organization of CNSNews.com, said the goal of this 2010 “Tell the Truth!” campaign “is simple: to force the liberals in the media to stop pushing an agenda and just tell the truth.”'
'The “liberal media news networks” need to report the facts about “massive growth in government and its control over our lives, and about spending, deficits and debt,” he told CNSNews.com. “They also need to tell the truth about the efforts to turn our country into a European-style Socialist state.”'
Here is Brent Bozell on the Tell The Truth Campaign:
Tito Edwards of The American Catholic has posted an excellent article by Charles E. Rice on the Notre Dame 88, which outlines the great injustice being committed by Notre Dame. Notre Dame refuses to drop the charges against Fr. Norman Weslin, O.S. and the rest of those who were arrested while peacefully entering Notre Dame Campus and praying while Obama, the most pro-abortion president ever, was receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame. Charles E. Rice explains about motions and decisions that have been made by the court so far. He also talks about questions left unresolved. On April 30, 2010 Fr. Jenkins released a statement saying:
“the University cannot have one set of rules for causes we oppose, and another more lenient set of rules for causes we support. We have one consistent set of rules for demonstrations on campus—no matter what the cause.”
Charles E. Rice points out how Father Jenkins statement is untrue. In fact, there is evidence that the university treats pro-gay and anti-military supporters better then their own pro-life, Catholic brethren. Then, Mr. Rice shares information on the "criminals" that have been stigmatized and targeted by Notre Dame.
Here is Ed Schultz spewing his hatred for conservatives:
Ed called conservatives “evil” at the one nation “working together” rally. He and other progressives make the unfounded accusation that conservatives are “evil” He also claims that conservatives don’t want to follow the constitution. Plus, he said that conservatives want to change this country. Like Obama’s whole mantra during his presidential campaign calling for “hope and change” somehow didn’t call for “change”. Okay, this guy is off his rocker, delusional. Was Ed in some kind of psychosis during the 2008 campaign? Nah, he believes changing from capitalism to socialism is good.
He is right about conservatives wanting to change the country . Conservatives are for returning to the principles instilled by our Founding Fathers. We are for getting back to our constitution. Conservatives believe that “all men are created equal”, and that includes those that aren’t able to speak for themselves, like the unborn.
This sad and pathetic man thinks that we’re “evil” when the liberals are the ones that make compromises with the devil. They are “pro-choice” and have been advocating for the infanticide of our children since before Roe vs. Wade was passed in 1973. Progressives advocate for pulling the plug on grandma - euthanasia. Conservatives stand up for those most vulnerable and their right to live while progressives prey on weak and innocent human beings. The Democratic Party is the party of death.
As for the accusation about conservatives not following the constitution, this is equally obnoxious coming from a self-proclaimed progressive. The progressive movement is about moving beyond the constitution. The constitution is what their trying to “progress” beyond and away from. They want to move America beyond the stage of being a representative republic. They want a social democracy. The constitution, as they understand it, is not the permanent law of the land but a “living document“ that can and should evolve into something entirely different from our Founders’ principles. Ed makes these absurd claims about conservatives. HotAir points out just how polarizing Ed Schultz is. Ed Schultz calling conservatives “evil” and disrespectful of the constitution is like “the pot calling the kettle black.”
I wanted to do a post on the Commie/Progressive Rally before it took place but will do it today even though it is after the rally took place. A few of the sponsors of the rally included: baby killers of AmericaPlanned Parenthood, Communist Party USA (CPUSA), and Democratic Socialists of America. The people who attended the rally are calling for socialism in America and believe in both identity politics and class warfare. Those at the rally want "free" health care, "free" government assistance for this and that, but don't realize that nothing is free. These people want to abandon their responsibilities and hand them over to the State. They want others to be obligated to fork over their hard earned money so that they don't have to. They want the "rich" to take care of their every need while at the same time trying to tear the rich man down, and trying to destroy his wealth. Maybe some do love this country but those that immigrated to the United States, whether legally or illegally, have a very odd way of showing it. They came to this country looking for more opportunities and to have a better way of life. They left their country because of the horrible living conditions there which is being caused by that country's failed economic system whether it be socialist or communist. But, for some reason they want to change America and are advocating for it to become a socialist or a communist country when those systems of government have been proven failures. This makes no sense. For some reason they can't make the connection between why they felt forced to or their need to leave their home country - why their home country's economy is failing- and why America is such a prosperous nation, and the land of opportunity. America has been the land of opportunity and freedom due to its economic policies since its inception. Yes, capitalism with the least amount of government intervention as possible has been proven to work and has made this nation a prosperous nation. The people at the rally don't realize that they are being used by the Democrat or progressive politicians whose primary goal is to promote government dependence and acquire as much control and power over our lives as possible. The politicians are manipulating these people like pawns on a chessboard. A rude awakening is coming if checkmate is ever declared.
Here are the organizations shown on onenationworkingtogether.org which endorsed the One Nation "Working Together" rally:
