ConservativeChristianRepublican-Report - 20091014

Motivational-Inspirational-Historical-Educational-Political-Enjoyable

Promoting "God's Holy Values and American Freedoms"!



"ObamaCare Vote"

US Senate "Committee on Finance" - Vote for ObamaCare 14 to 9.

The majority Capitol Hill Democrats and a few Republicans are destroying our current Healthcare system, as well as our personal wealth, regardless of how small or how large, and our US economy. The poor are going to end up destitute, while the financially successful will end up much poorer, unable to have the resources to expand our economy to create new jobs for the masses. Why do the Liberals fail to see the real picture? All Democrats voted for ObamaCare. Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe voted with the Liberal majority Democrats. All other Republicans voted no. - oyh


Democrats

MAX BAUCUS, MT
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, WV
KENT CONRAD, ND
JEFF BINGAMAN, NM
JOHN F. KERRY, MA
BLANCHE L. LINCOLN, AR
RON WYDEN, OR
CHARLES E. SCHUMER, NY
DEBBIE STABENOW, MI
MARIA CANTWELL, WA
BILL NELSON, FL
ROBERT MENENDEZ, NJ
THOMAS CARPER, DE

REPUBLICANS

CHUCK GRASSLEY, IA
ORRIN G. HATCH, UT
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, ME
JON KYL, AZ
JIM BUNNING, KY
MIKE CRAPO, ID
PAT ROBERTS, KS
JOHN ENSIGN, NV
MIKE ENZI, WY
JOHN CORNYN, TX



"My Comments"

Sen. Snowe, Please Join Sen. Specter!

For America to return to the GOP era of Ronald Reagan, the RNC must take vigorous changes, showing Americans candidates of the GOP support and represent the Conservative values of the GOP Platform.

Please, Sen. Snowe! Please join Sen. Specter and change your voter registration to the Democrat Party. Yes, I mean it. I mean every word of it. Again, please!

I am sick and tired of you Sen. Snowe, along with your senate colleague Sen. Collins pretending to be a Republican, when in fact you two support some 20% or less of the GOP Platform and its’ values. It is you Sen. Snowe, and the likes, who have made the average American see there is little to no differences between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party. Your voting records support the Democrat Party, and it’s very different values of the Republican Party.

It is imperative that the Republican National Committee discontinue any assistance, whatsoever to Sen. Snowe, Sen. Collins, and the equally liberal likes. When that decision is made, you will see Americans returning to the GOP, with their votes, their activities, and with their resources. Please stop the liberal Republicans In Name Only (RINO) from the destroying the values of our GOP Platform. This decision will make the GOP stronger, currently and later on.

God Bless America!

Oscar Y. Harward



"Daily Motivations"

Far too many leaders are ill prepared to effectively address employee performance problems…and it shows. It takes its toll — on their organizations and the leaders themselves. But it doesn't have to be that way. -- Eric Harvey




"Daily Devotions" (KJV and/or NLT)

Then Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, "Surely the Lord is in this place, and I wasn't even aware of it!" -- (Genesis 28:16)

Have you ever had that feeling you were being watched? Your reaction would depend upon who was doing the watching, wouldn't it?

Mom was doing some baking for the holiday season. On one end of the kitchen counter, she had set a plate of apples, ready to be put into a pie at the proper time. But in a house with two teenagers, the inevitable occurred. Every time she left the kitchen for a moment, another apple would disappear. She really needed every one of them for the number of pies that needed to be baked. So she hand-wrote a sign and placed it next to the plate of apples. "Hands off! God is watching." Maybe this would make her two kids think twice.

Next time she returned from a brief absence, she noticed the apples and sign were undisturbed. However, on the other end of the counter, where she had just placed a hot, fresh batch of cookies, there was a second sign. It read: "Help yourself--God is watching the apples!"

If the story makes us smile, it's because we realize God can watch more than one place at one time. As a matter of fact, He is everywhere all the time. He never sleeps. He never turns away.



"The Patriot Post"

"An unlimited power to tax involves, necessarily, a power to destroy." -- John Marshall




GOVERNMENT & POLITICS

Siege Warfare & Health Care Reform

Smelling what they rightly sense is their own blood in the water from the public backlash against the so-called "public option," congressional Bolsheviks (i.e., Democrats) have retreated to lick their wounds from the loss of their erstwhile health care reform centerpiece. Or have they?

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) certainly doesn't think so. Using a tried-and-true leftist tactic -- two steps forward, one step back, gaining position under the guise of "losing" ground -- Baucus re-grouped by championing his health care bill, the core of which rests on mandatory health insurance and massive Medicaid spending. How massive? Weighing in at $1 trillion, the bill is threefold the total cost of Lyndon Johnson's "Great Society" programs of the '60s.

Democrats want to cover everyone up to 33 percent above the federal poverty level (about $30,000 for a family of four), adding more than 11 million new bodies to Medicaid rosters by 2019. The total covered would be 70 million people, or roughly one-quarter of America's population.. Oh yeah: "Everyone" includes illegal aliens, or so say at least 21 House Democrats who signed a statement from the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus affirming the same. The Congressional Anglo Saxon Caucus has yet to weigh in.

As an added bonus, those not covered under Medicaid must purchase health insurance (the so-called "individual mandate") or face fines up to $25,000 and/or one year in prison for tax evasion. You may recall the "individual mandate" as the "not-really-a-tax" tax (an IRS "excise tax," to be precise), which President Barack Obama lamely defended last week when confronted by ABC's George Stephanopoulos with his promise not to raise taxes on middle class families "by a single penny." At $1,900 per person for the tax-that's-not-a-tax, and not withstanding his creative wordsmithing, Obama would be into most Americans for a couple hundred thousand pennies' worth of broken promises.

However, since entitlements are leading the charge toward national bankruptcy with the lion's share of the nation's $12 trillion debt and $100 plus trillion in existing un-funded liabilities, isn't it required of citizens to ask whether more entitlement spending is warranted when we can't even fund existing programs? This question is even more relevant at the state level, where all but two states face either substantial or severe shortfalls. Notably, Medicaid is on average the second largest element of state budgets, trailing only slightly behind K-12 education.

Let's also not miss the salient lesson from this sordid vignette: The fight for freedom is a constant struggle against siege warfare. In this case, under the guise of health care "reform," statists would redistribute wealth while accruing power to the government, and if they can't accomplish their goal one way (the "public option"), they will do it another (Medicaid with the "individual mandate"). The only way to counter this constant siege against liberty is to remain vigilant and vocal against these Trojan horse ruses.

As if to punctuate this lesson, Sens. John Rockefeller (D-WV) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) both promised to raise amendments to the Baucus bill adding -- you guessed it -- the "public option."



This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award

"If you get sick, America, the Republican healthcare plan is this: die quickly. That's right. The Republicans want you to die quickly if you get sick. ... I apologize to the dead and their families that we haven't voted sooner to end this holocaust in America." -- Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) on the health care takeover



The BIG Lie

"It could be that the 2016 Games are the last Olympics in the history of mankind. Global warming is getting worse. We have to come up with measures without which Olympic Games could not last long." -- Tokyo governor Shintaro Ishihara

Is a Lack of Vetting What Obama Meant by 'Transparency'?
Back on the campaign trail, Barack Obama vowed his would be the most "transparent" administration in U.S. history. Perhaps what he meant was that the mainstream media would look past the foibles of those he selects for high positions under his watch.

The latest "for instance" comes in the person of "Safe School Czar" Kevin Jennings. Apparently, in the eyes of Jennings, a "safe school" is one where it's safe for an adult male to pursue a homosexual relationship with a student. Jennings denied condoning a relationship between a 15-year-old student and an adult male and threatened to sue a fellow teacher who called his refusal to report the incident "unethical." But since then, an audiotape has surfaced on which Jennings related to an Iowa homosexual advocacy group that he told the student to make sure to use a condom when seeing the older man. To most of us, allowing -- and even promoting -- statutory rape is grotesque, unquestionably illegal and grossly negligent, but to Obama, it appears to be qualification for the job.

Meanwhile, a recent GOP amendment prohibiting the creation of "czar" positions unless Congress confirms appointees was killed by a procedural move made by Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Chicago).



NATIONAL SECURITY

Warfront With Jihadistan: Terrorist Plots Foiled

An unsettling string of arrests for terrorist plots within the U.S. occurred last week. In Springfield, Illinois, Talib Islam was arrested for allegedly trying to detonate explosives in a van outside a federal courthouse; in North Carolina, Daniel Patrick Boyd and Hysen Sherifi were indicted for planning to attack the Quantico Marine Corps base; in Dallas, Hosam Maher Husein Smadi was arrested in an FBI sting when he parked an SUV packed with what he thought were explosives outside a Dallas skyscraper and attempted to detonate it; and finally, in New York City, an Afghan immigrant, Najibullah Zazi, was arrested for planning to attack commuter trains on the anniversary of 9/11. Allegedly, at least three of his accomplices are still at large. All these arrests occurred soon after government officials issued a flurry of terrorism warnings for popular, crowded areas such as sports complexes, hotels and mass transit systems.

As troubling as this string of terrorism arrests is, even more disturbing is the reaction of the Obama regime and their minions in the Leftmedia. The federal government tried to play down the arrests, alleging there was absolutely no connection between the varied plots. (We're not sure, but the suspects' names seem to imply some sort of connection, if we could just lay our finger on it...) The Leftmedia also downplayed the arrests, with some even speculating that in spite of this increased terrorist activity, al-Qa'ida-type terrorism is actually in decline. Strangely, no one in the press noted that these kinds of incidents are not supposed to occur in the Era of Hope and Change™.

A more rational analysis could easily conclude that the reason there was no known link between the plots is that these are acts of individual terrorist sleeper cells here in the U.S. It also would appear that the intelligence community knew something was up, which led to earlier warnings and allowed anti-terrorism officials to take action before any of the plots could be effectively executed. We hope (but aren't holding our breath) that Obama now sees how effective the anti-terrorist policies put into place by President George W. Bush really are. It's interesting that these arrests coincide with the administration's announcement last Friday that the January deadline for closing Guantanamo Bay might not be met.



Immigration Front: Border Patrol to Move Agents North

The U.S. Border Patrol, part of the Department of Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection, is responsible for securing a total of 8,607 miles of border, including the U.S.-Mexico border, the U.S.-Canada border and some sectors of coastline. Each year, the Border Patrol sets a goal for "border miles under effective control (including certain coastal sectors)," defined as an area in which the Border Patrol detects an illegal border crosser and can be expected to succeed in apprehending that person.

In its May performance review, DHS said the Border Patrol's goal for fiscal 2009 was to have 815 of the 8,607 miles of border -- less than 10 percent -- under "effective control." The goal remains the same for fiscal 2010, meaning DHS does not plan to secure a single additional mile of border in the coming year. On Aug. 31, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report to Congress on the effectiveness of the Border Patrol. Its findings were not exactly encouraging.

For example, the Border Patrol established three performance measures to report the results of checkpoint operations, and while they provide some insight into checkpoint activity, they do not indicate if checkpoints are operating efficiently and effectively. Second, GAO found that a lack of management oversight and unclear checkpoint data-collection guidance resulted in the overstatement of checkpoint performance results in recent reports, as well as inconsistent data collection practices at checkpoints. Furthermore, individuals GAO contacted who live near checkpoints generally supported their operations but expressed concerns regarding property damage that occurs when illegal aliens and smugglers circumvent checkpoints to avoid apprehension.

Here's the kicker: The U.S.-Mexico border is 1,954 miles long, with only 697 miles under "effective control," but the Border Patrol plans to decrease the 17,399 Border Patrol agents on that border by 384 agents in Fiscal 2009. Some 414 will be added to the Canadian border for a total of 2,212. Maybe BO is concerned about the Canucks crossing the border for U.S. health care -- at least until ObamaCare ruins that option..



BUSINESS & ECONOMY

Around the Nation: Tax Foundation Report on the States
A report just released by the Tax Foundation has given the unwelcome title of least "business-friendly" states to -- no surprises here -- New Jersey, New York and California. On the other end of the spectrum is South Dakota, which has the most business-friendly tax system, followed by Wyoming and Alaska. Evaluating states based on taxes that matter most to businesses -- corporate income, individual income, sales, unemployment insurance and property taxes -- the foundation found that the blue state trio boasts "the most inhospitable [tax structures] to economic growth." The foundation noted, "The ideal tax system ... is simple, transparent, stable, neutral to business activity, and pro-growth."

Interestingly, a study released earlier this year by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University ranked the same bottom three states among the five least free states in the country in terms of economic and personal freedom as measured by "state and local government intervention across a wide range of public policies." New Hampshire, which tied for first in freedom, also came in as one of the Tax Foundation's most business-friendly states.

Unfortunately, the most anti-business states have yet to fully grasp the connection. For example, it appeared to be news to California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office when it announced this week that small business regulations have cost the state $492 billion and a whopping 3..8 million jobs, amounting to $134,122 and one job loss per small business in 2007.

So, freedom = economic growth, while burdensome government regulations = economic contraction. Coincidence? We think not.



CULTURE & POLICY

Second Amendment: SCOTUS to Consider Gun Rights Again

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to Chicago's handgun ban. Last year, the court ruled in Heller v. District of Columbia that the Second Amendment does, in fact, mean what it says -- that law-abiding citizens have a right to keep and bear arms. The $64,000 question this time is whether the Second Amendment applies to states and local, not just federal, jurisdictions?

As we have pointed out before, few would question that the First Amendment applies to states and localities, even though it says, "Congress shall make no law..." [emphasis added]. The Second Amendment unambiguously applies to all jurisdictions: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Yet the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled earlier this year that the Constitution places no limits on state authority to ban guns. The Second Circuit ruled likewise in a similar New York case in which then-Second Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor ruled against the Second Amendment. But, now-Justice Sotomayor will be permitted to take part in the Supreme Court hearings of the Chicago case. We think we can guess which way she will vote.



Village Academic Curriculum II: Another Creepy Video

After last week's video of New Jersey kids http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8grOVPu_sRU singing praises to Barack Hussein Obama, another video surfaced http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcNfajMA4zQ of kids in North Carolina doing likewise. Great moments in public education, indeed.

Meanwhile, a gang of community organizers led by the "Gamaliel Foundation" is on video shouting, "Hear our cry, Obama!" and "Deliver us, Obama!" The O-cult continues.



"Simple Truths"

For A Child, Love is Spelled TIME
http://www.tacmovie.com/



"The Web"

YouTube: The Truth About the Baucus Healthcare Bill (Video)

http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/youtube-the-truth-about-the-baucus-healthcare-bill/



Sunstein: Take organs from 'helpless patients'

'Though it may sound grotesque, routine removal would save lives'

By Aaron Klein
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=112757

Cass Sunstein

TEL AVIV – President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory czar defended the possibility of removing organs from terminally ill patients without their permission.

Cass Sunstein also has strongly pushed for the removal of organs from deceased individuals who did not explicitly consent to becoming organ donors.

In his 2008 book, "Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness," Sunstein and co-author Richard Thaler discussed multiple legal scenarios regarding organ donation

. One possibility presented in the book, termed by Sunstein as "routine removal," posits that "the state owns the rights to body parts of people who are dead or in certain hopeless conditions, and it can remove their organs without asking anyone's permission."

"Though it may sound grotesque, routine removal is not impossible to defend," wrote Sunstein. "In theory, it would save lives, and it would do so without intruding on anyone who has any prospect for life."

Get Mark Levin's "Liberty and Tyranny" for the amazing price of just $4.95 – today only!

Sunstein continued: "Although this approach is not used comprehensively by any state, many states do use the rule for corneas (which can be transplanted to give some blind patients sight). In some states, medical examiners performing autopsies are permitted to remove corneas without asking anyone's permission."

Sunstein's example of medical examiners removing corneas, however, applies only to patients who are already declared deceased.

After defending the position, Sunstein conceded the "routine removal" approach "violates a generally accepted principle, which is that within broad limits, individuals should be able to decide what is to be done with and to their bodies."

Still, Sunstein did not add that the removal of organs from a living individual should be banned.

Also in the same book, CNS News previously noted Sunstein argued for removing organs from deceased patients who are not registered as organ donors, a policy not without precedent. Spain and some European Union countries have been debating accepting a law of implied consent.

Writes Sunstein: "A policy that can pass libertarian muster by our standards is called presumed consent."

"Presumed consent preserves freedom of choice, but it is different from explicit consent because it shifts the default rule. Under this policy, all citizens would be presumed to be consenting donors, but they would have the opportunity to register their unwillingness to donate, and they could do so easily. We want to underline the word easily, because the harder it is to register your unwillingness to participate, the less libertarian the policy becomes."

Sunstein continues: "Although presumed consent is an extremely effective way to increase the supply of organs available for transplant, it may not be an easy sell politically. Some will object to the idea of 'presuming' anything when it comes to such a sensitive matter. We are not sure that these objections are convincing, but this is surely a domain in which forced choosing, or what is referred to in this domain as mandated choice, has considerable appeal."

Sunstein advocates making it mandatory for all citizens to register either as an organ donor or as unwilling to donate their organs.

"Mandated choice could be implemented through a simple addition to the driver's license registration scheme used in many states. With mandated choice, renewal of your driver's license would be accompanied by a requirement that you check a box stating your organ donation preferences. Your application would not be accepted unless you had checked one of the boxes. The options might include 'yes, willing to donate' and 'no, unwilling to donate.'"

Government must fund abortion

Sunstein is not shy about his view concerning rights to life or abortion.

WND reported that in his 1993 book, "The Partial Constitution," Sunstein argued the government should be required to fund abortion in cases such as rape or incest.

"I have argued that the Constitution ... forbids government from refusing to pay the expenses of abortion in cases of rape or incest, at least if government pays for childbirth in such cases," Sunstein wrote.

The Obama czar asserts that funding only childbirth but not abortion "has the precise consequence of turning women into involuntary incubators."

Sunstein argues that refusing to fund abortion "would require poor women to be breeders," while co-opting women's bodies "in the service of third parties" – referring to fetuses.

Sunstein wrote he has no problem with forcing taxpayers to fund abortions even if they morally object to their money being used for such a purpose.

He wrote: "There would be no tension with the establishment clause if people with religious or other objections were forced to pay for that procedure (abortion). Indeed, taxpayers are often forced to pay for things – national defense, welfare, certain forms of art, and others – to which they have powerful moral and even religious objections."



Loyal Democrats Endorse Obamacare

Is it News When Obama Donors Endorse Obama Policies?

http://www.redstate.com/brianfaughnan/2009/10/06/loyal-democrats-endorse-obamacare/



Posted by Brian Faughnan

The White House made a big deal of the support it has garnered from physicians around the country. Yesterday they even held a doctors’ rally - complete with white smocks - to show support. Yet the physicians in attendance weren’t the disinterested crowd President Obama suggested - many were longtime Democrat donors.

Based on the list of attendees provided to Time, it seems that the crowd was full of ringers. Here is a look at the history of political donations by some in attendance. It is not complete, but this is what I was able to find by searching the database at Congressional Quarterly:

Dr. Hershey Garner: more than $10,000 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Mona Mangat: $500 in donations to Barack Obama last year.
Dr. Amanda McKinney: $2,750 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Alice Chen: $1,810 in donations to Barack Obama since last year.
Dr. Michael Newman: $4,550 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Jason Schneider: $600 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Stanton McKenna: $1,000 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Biron Baker: $500 donated to Barack Obama last year.
Dr. Nick Perencevich: $500 in donations to Democrats since 2008.
Dr. Elaine Bradshaw: $500 in donations to Barack Obama last year.
Dr. Boyd Shook: $3,500 in donations to Democrats since 2002.
Dr. Tracy Nelson: $1,500 in donations to Barack Obama.
Dr. Winfred Parnell: More than $5,700 in donations to Democrats since 2001.
Dr. Gary Goldbaum: $300 in donations to Democrats since 2004.
Dr. Jan Sarnecki: $3,400 in donations to Democrats since 2004.
According to the White House, the rally was attended by about 150 doctors. I have only checked the backgrounds of the 50 identified to Time. Given the highly political nature of the debate, I’m willing to bet that the White House did its best to highlight the support of those who don’t have a long history of supporting Democrats. Thus, we might expect that the other 100 doctors are more consistent Democrat donors.
It’s too bad the White House didn’t state up front that some unspecified swath of those in attendance were confirmed partisans - not the impartial experts the White House claimed.
They should change their name to Liberal Doctors for America.
Cross-posted to theconservatives.com
Note: My Washington Times colleague Amanda Carpenter has more on this.



New Jersey Polls Show Governor Candidate Christie Leading Pro-Abortion Corzine

by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor

http://www.lifenews.com/state4330.html

Trenton, NJ (LifeNews.com) -- New polling data in the governor's race in New Jersey continues to show Republican challenger Chris Christie holding a substantial lead over pro-abortion Gov. Jon Corzine. A new Rasmussen Reports survey of voters in the Garden State finds Christie on top 50% to 37%.

Another 5 percent prefer another candidate and eight percent of voters are unsure.

The 13 percentage point lead is a gain for Christie over his pro-abortion counterpart, as a Rasmussen poll had Christie ahead by just seven percent in early July.

In that poll, Christie’s lead stretched to 12-points when "leaners" were included and Rasmussen says it now appears those who were leaning in the challengers direction have become more firm in their decision.

Leaners are those who initially indicate no preference for either of the candidates but answer a follow-up question and say they are leaning towards a particular candidate. Currently, Christie’s lead is at 13-points both with and without leaners.

The Rasmussen poll finds 84 percent of Republican voters now back Christie, but only 64% of Democrats support Corzine. The GOP candidate leads 64% to 19% among voters not affiliated with either major party.

A win in the New Jersey governor's race, combined with a win for pro-life candidate Bob McDonnell in the Virginia governor's race would be a rebound for pro-life advocates given that both states went for pro-abortion President Barack Obama in the 2008 election.

Rasmussen cautioned against assuming that Christie will be able to defeat the abortion advocate.

"Despite Christie’s strengthened lead, it’s important to note that a Republican has not won statewide office in New Jersey since 1997, and Democratic candidates often close strong in the fall. Corzine is expected to significantly outspend his challenger during the closing months of the campaign," the polling firm wrote in its analysis.

Just 37% approve of Corzine’s performance as governor, down three points from a month ago. Sixty-three percent (63%) disapprove, an increase of five in the same period.

But those who strongly disapprove of the job Corzine is doing outnumber those who strongly approve by a four-to-one margin – 44% to 11%.

On a personal basis, 37% have a favorable view of Corzine, down six points from early July. Even worse news for the governor is that he is now viewed unfavorably by 62%, a 16-point jump from the previous survey.



Will Fox News Be Banned From Census Money?

http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/census_fox_news_beck/2009/10/11/270963.html?s=al&promo_code=8BAC-1

The upcoming 2020 Census comes with a mega-budget for advertising to media companies to encourage citizens to participate – but some media companies may be banned if the Obama-run Census Bureau has its way.

The Census Bureau’s web site details its planned media offensive “in order to inform everyone about the 2010 Census and its importance, the U.S. Census Bureau has developed an integrated communications campaign (ICC) that includes paid media, earned media, a national partnership program and the Census in Schools program.”

But the Census Bureau also makes clear that media with “controversial talk” formats will be banned from getting any ad deals, as will other media that don’t fit the Census Bureau criteria. According to the Census, prejudice and bigotry are the biggest moral crimes and saying something bad about an imam can get you blacklisted.



New York-Based Muslim's Web Site Calls for God to 'Kill the Jews'

By Joshua Rhett Miller

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,565365,00.html

RevolutionMuslim.com

Yousef al-Khattab, formerly Joseph Cohen, is seen here in an undated photograph.

A New York bicycle cabbie who last year used his Web site to mock the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl posted a prayer calling for the murder of Jews and exhorting Muslims to “throw liquid drain cleaner in their faces." And there's nothing authorities can do about it.

Yousef al-Khattab, who runs RevolutionMuslim.com and pedals a pedicab in New York City, insists the words he has posted on his Web site are a prayer, and not a threat — and that his hatred is protected by the First Amendment.

"If it was a threat, I'd be in jail," the 41-year-old al-Khattab told Foxnews.com from his home in Queens. "I'm asking my God, that's what it is. Every supporter of Israel is an enemy combatant and the immune system is not anti-Semitic for resisting disease."

Al-Khattab removed the Oct. 7 post a "few days ago" and replaced it with a post about a mosque in Jerusalem.

An American-born Jew formerly known as Joseph Cohen who converted to Islam after attending an Orthodox rabbinical school — al-Khattab called on Allah to carry out "wrath on the Jewish occupiers of Palestine & their supporters."

"Please throw liquid drain cleaner in their faces," he wrote. " … burn their flammable sukkos while they sleep … Ya Allah (Oh God) answer my duaa (prayer)." ("Sukkos" refers to the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, during which Jews build and eat their meals in outdoor huts known as "sukkahs," which represent the huts the Jews lived in during their exodus from Egypt.)

Judge Andrew Napolitano, Fox News' senior legal analyst, said the posting is "absolutely protected" by the First Amendment.
"All innocuous speech is absolutely protected and all speech is innocuous when there is time for more speech to rebut or address it," he told Foxnews.com. "So even if this Web site were to call on Muslim freedom fighters to kill Jews, as long as there is time for someone else to challenge this with words, then the originals words are lawful."

The blog post, signed by al-Khattab, notes that it should be taken only as a "prayer" and not as an incitement to genocide. But officials at the Anti-Defamation League are worried about its ability to influence others.

"Whether it's a poem or a prayer, however he describes it, he decided to post it. And if you're going to be posting a prayer like that, you just don't know who's going to read that and who might be influenced by it," said Oren Segal, director of the ADL's Center on Extremism. "There's a certain amount of responsibility behind posting your own blog. We take it very seriously."

Segal said the New York Police Department is "aware" of the blog post. Calls to Paul Browne, deputy commissioner of public information for the NYPD, were not immediately returned.

RevolutionMuslim.com has been monitored by the ADL since 2006, Segal said, and has roughly five to 10 active members who frequently distribute anti-Semitic literature in front of mosques throughout New York City.

"This is a group we've monitored for a while," Segal said. "This is nothing particularly new, but then again, [the threat] has the ability to potentially influence people."

The posting reflects the "prayer of every true Muslim," al-Khattab said.

"Every true Muslim would say the same thing," he continued. "Most people would agree that any occupied people have the right to defend themselves."

Al-Khattab, who said he's driven a pedicab in New York for the last three years, is married with four kids. He said he's driven plenty of Jewish passengers without incident.

"I've never killed one," he told Foxnews.com. "I suffer from mental Tourette's [syndrome]. I say what's on my mind. We have freedom of speech."

Al-Khattab said he created RevolutionMuslim.com with the mission of "preserving Islamic culture" and seeking support of the "beloved Sheik Abdullah Faisal, who's preaching the religion of Islam and serving as a spiritual guide."

Faisal was convicted in the U.K. in 2003 for spreading messages of racial hatred and urging his followers to kill Jews, Hindus and Westerners. In sermon recordings played at his trial, Faisal called on young, impressionable Muslims to use chemical weapons to “exterminate unbelievers” and “cut the throat of the Kaffars [nonbelievers] with [a] machete.”

Authorities believe Faisal’s sermons influenced London transport bomber Germaine Lindsay and the so-called "shoe bomber," Richard Reid, who attended mosques where Faisal preached.

FBI spokesman Richard Kolko told Foxnews.com last year that it's difficult to bring criminal charges against operators of Web sites like RevolutionMuslim.com unless specific threats are made.

'It's usually a First Amendment right if they don't cross the threshold of making threats," Kolko said. "There's nothing we should or could do."

Gregg Zukowski, president of the NYC Pedicab Association, said al-Khattab has been riding a pedicab in midtown Manhattan "on and off" for the past several years without any reported incidents. Zukowski was unaware of al-Khattab's Web site.

"He's just like one of a 1,000 guys who ride a pedicab," Zukowski told Foxnews.com. "There's nothing that sticks out about him in particular."



The 3 R’s in the Age of Obama: Rappin’, revolution & radicalism

By Michelle Malkin

http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/25/the-3-rs-in-the-age-of-obama-rappin-revolution-radicalism/

When the White House announced plans for the president’s nationwide address to schoolchildren two weeks ago, worried parents were dismissed as “kooks.” We pointed to the subtext of “social justice” activism rampant in American classrooms. It’s time for a big, fat Told You So.

Out of the spotlight, politicized lessons continue to supplant core academics.

At the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington Township, N.J. earlier this year, schoolchildren were instructed to memorize a paean to Barack Obama. A video uploaded to the YouTube account of Charisse Carney-Nunes, author of the children’s book “I Am Barack Obama” and a self-described Harvard Law “schoolmate” of the president’s, showed students lined up in the auditorium snapping their fingers and chanting in unison:

Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said all should lend a hand to make the country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said we must be fair today, equal work means equal pay.

Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said take a stand, make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama
He said red, yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barack Hussein Obama
Yeah! Barack Hussein Obama

…Hello Mr. President, We honor you today
For all your great accomplishments, we all do say hooray
Hooray, Mr. President you are No. 1
The first black American to lead this nation

Acknowledging the historic nature of Obama’s presidency (“the first black American”) is one thing. Deifying him with creepy spiritual references (“red, yellow, black and white, all are equal in his sight” is cribbed from the famous hymn “Jesus Loves the Little Children;” cheering “you are No. 1”) is quite another. Burlington Township (NJ) school officials said Thursday the recording and dissemination of the video was “unauthorized,” but acknowledged that the Obama praise session was part of the students’ official curriculum.

Carney-Nunes’s Obama book was on prominent display during the students’ performance. It is a tool, she says, that “allows children to see themselves through the inspirational story of President Obama growing up as an ordinary child asking, ‘Who will change the world? Ultimately, he realizes that he will.’” Seeing everything through the lens of Obama, as his incessantly self-referential United Nations speech demonstrated, is a trademark of the perpetual Obama campaign.

This O-cult lesson is exactly the kind of junior campaign lobbying activity that White House officials planned around the president’s education speech. Alert parents and administrators called out the Department of Education’s activist, Obama-centric education manuals before the event. Federal officials altered the language. Obama delivered an innocuous speech. But on cue, education radicals goaded students to engage in political activism.

White House and Hollywood moguls launched a “Get Schooled” initiative this month with Obama that urges students to lobby for higher teacher pay and to embrace the rallying cries “Know Your Rights” and “Change the System.”

At the New Trier High School in Northfield, Illinois, educators followed up on President Obama’s address with a 45-minute “extended adviser” discussion last week to explore “the significant messages inherent in his speech.” Illinois writer/blogger Tom Blumer reports that “parents were not informed on a timely basis as to what was going to happen, and were given no specific instructions on how to have their child opt out of the ‘discussions.’” The school’s principal and assistant principal sent out suggestive questions focused on Dear Leader’s Do Something missives:

* Why do you think President Obama listed the responsibilities of teachers, parents, and the government before discussing your responsibility for your education?
* What are you “good at” and what do you have “to offer” your family, friends, and community?
* In the speech, President Obama spoke of some of the steps of Effective Effort. Identify them, using direct quotations from the text to support your assertions.
* Respond to President Obama’s final questions for you: “What’s your contribution going to be?…”

In addition to radical White House Teaching Fellows like Chicago high school educator Xian Barrett (an outspoken charter school foe who founded a “Social Justice Club” and bussed students to protest) and Michelle Bissonnette, a Los Altos, Calif., teacher who is “focused on developing my leadership as a more culturally and racially conscious educator,” the White House has embraced controversial homosexual rights’ advocate Kevin Jennings as “Safe Schools czar.” Jennings founded the controversial GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network), which aggressively pushes sexually explicit, age-inappropriate books and lesson plans on alternative lifestyles.

Lost in all the chanting for change is the core commitment to impart actual knowledge. For progressives in the Age of Obama, setting high academic standards is secondary to the self-improvement of the “whole child” and “service” to the cause of social justice.

Out: Readin’, writin’, and ‘rithmetic.

In: Rappin’, revolution, and radicalism.

Mmm, mmm, mmm.



"The e-mail Bag"

STUCK ON YOU

http://home.comcast.net/~singingman7777/SOY.htm



Just another blonde joke

A married couple were asleep when the phone rang at 2 in the morning. The very blonde wife picked up the phone, listened a moment and said ......

'How should I know, that's 200 miles from here!' and hung up.

The husband said, 'Who was that?'

The wife answered, 'I don't know, some woman wanting to know if the coast is clear.'