Just two interesting points.
1. A peaceful Muslim in Oklahoma writes a letter opposing terrorism and calling on leaders within his faith to take a strong stand against violence in the name of Islam. We are told that the extremists are a small minority. But poor Jamal Miftah has been expelled from his mosque for expressing what the MSM tells us is the majority view. Read more at Western Resistance
2. A contrite, apologetic Pope Benedict goes to Turkey amid protests, vile depictions of him on posters and in an atmosphere in which a book titled Attack on the Pope: Who Will Kill the Pope in Istanbul? has become wildly popular.
Religion of peace?
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Dismantling Our Security
The left along with jihadist radicals are now in the process of trying to clear the security obstacles that protect our airlines from future hijackings.
Perhaps by now you have read of the six Imams removed from a US Airways flight in Minnesota. They are claiming that this was an act of profiling and Islamophobia and lawsuits are being discussed. The six were removed after passengers expressed concern for their behavior.
The MSM is not reporting the full story here, and the phrase "Flying While Muslim" seems to cast all this in a racist light. You can read more at Jihad Watch.
Turns out the Imams were discussing Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein among other political topics in both Arabic and English. They were quite loud in their "prayers" shouting the name of Allah as passengers were boarding. According to the Washington Times:
Turns out that one of the Imams, Omar Shahin, has his own connections to terror.
It seems more and more obvious that these six were staging an act designed to arouse suspicion. Their refusal to take their own seats, combined with their loud prayers and pronouncements achieved their purpose of getting them removed from the flight. As a result they are able to stir up a controversy and play the victim card.
The MSM is giving them all the attention they want. Such as this story by KGET TV. In it Shahin basically accuses the airline's personnel of overreacting to hysterical suspicions on the part of fellow passengers. He also reiterates how "humiliated" he and the others were.
But Shahin is not new to all this. Front Page Mag has a great story on this.
So, they stage an act of discrimination, protest their humiliating treatment and
as I posted earlier Democrats are already talking about measures they want to take to prevent "profiling" when they take over Congress. Sounds to me like a concerted effort to clear the way for future terror attacks. God help us.
Perhaps by now you have read of the six Imams removed from a US Airways flight in Minnesota. They are claiming that this was an act of profiling and Islamophobia and lawsuits are being discussed. The six were removed after passengers expressed concern for their behavior.
The MSM is not reporting the full story here, and the phrase "Flying While Muslim" seems to cast all this in a racist light. You can read more at Jihad Watch.
Turns out the Imams were discussing Osama Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein among other political topics in both Arabic and English. They were quite loud in their "prayers" shouting the name of Allah as passengers were boarding. According to the Washington Times:
Witnesses said three of the imams were praying loudly in the concourse and repeatedly shouted "Allah" when passengers were called for boarding US Airways Flight 300 to Phoenix.
"I was suspicious by the way they were praying very loud," the gate agent told the Minneapolis Police Department.
Passengers and flight attendants told law-enforcement officials the imams switched from their assigned seats to a pattern associated with the September 11 terrorist attacks and also found in probes of U.S. security since the attacks -- two in the front row first-class, two in the middle of the plane on the exit aisle and two in the rear of the cabin.
"That would alarm me," said a federal air marshal who asked to remain anonymous. "They now control all of the entry and exit routes to the plane."
A pilot from another airline said: "That behavior has been identified as a terrorist probe in the airline industry."
Turns out that one of the Imams, Omar Shahin, has his own connections to terror.
It seems more and more obvious that these six were staging an act designed to arouse suspicion. Their refusal to take their own seats, combined with their loud prayers and pronouncements achieved their purpose of getting them removed from the flight. As a result they are able to stir up a controversy and play the victim card.
The MSM is giving them all the attention they want. Such as this story by KGET TV. In it Shahin basically accuses the airline's personnel of overreacting to hysterical suspicions on the part of fellow passengers. He also reiterates how "humiliated" he and the others were.
But Shahin is not new to all this. Front Page Mag has a great story on this.
In examining the Nov. 21 incident more closely, we find that among those removed, Shahin, heads a particularly intriguing organization. Founded in 1971, the ICT’s $1.5 million mosque was funded largely by the Saudi government through the North American Islamist Trust, a Saudi-backed Wahhabist group that controls a majority of the most radical mosques in North America.
According to Washington-based terrorist expert Rita Katz, the Islamic Center of Tucson included what was “basically the first cell of Al Qaeda in the United States.” The connections between Al Qaeda and the ICT include Wael Hamza Jalaidan, a former ICT president, believed to be an Al Qaeda founder, and Hani Hanjour, who attended the mosque while a student at the University of Arizona and who later flew American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon on 9/11. Wadih El-Hage, a personal assistant to terrorist leader Osama Bin Laden, was active with the ICT in the late 1980’s where he is alleged to have established an Al Qaeda support network, according to the FBI. In 2001, El Hage was convicted by a federal judge in New York of planning the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.
Besides nurturing ICT activists who have gone on to become bone fide terrorists, the Islamic Center of Tucson has played a prominent role in raising money for terrorist front groups. The ICT raised money for the Holy Land Foundation, whose assets were frozen by the U.S. Treasury in 2001 for alleged ties to terrorist groups. Following the treasury action, ICT Imam Omar Shahin continued to defend the organization and its “charitable” intent. Further, Shahin had been a representative of KindHearts, an organization that made contributions to Hamas-related groups and was also shut down by the U.S. government for alleged connections to terrorist causes.
So, they stage an act of discrimination, protest their humiliating treatment and
as I posted earlier Democrats are already talking about measures they want to take to prevent "profiling" when they take over Congress. Sounds to me like a concerted effort to clear the way for future terror attacks. God help us.
Dick Durbin: Defender of the Little Guy
Thank God for our Senior Senator, Dick Durbin. What would the suffering, struggling and oppressed do without him to protect and champion their issues? Remember how well he defended the suffering terrorists by using the well of the Senate to call American Soldiers Nazis?
Well, with his party poised to take control of the Senate, Durbin may be able to finally pass legislation aimed to help the neediest among us; that's right, help is on the way for...LAWYERS!
You heard it right folks, Durbin has been trying for years to pass a GI Bill for Lawyers. In legislation he plans to re-introduce next year, Durbin plans to give up to $10,000 per year to lawyers who work in the public sector to help pay off their student loans.
I'm so happy I won't need to lose sleep anymore worrying about how lawyers are going to manage their student loan debt. Under the "Prosecutors and Defenders Initiative Act" there will be a cap of $60,000 and the program will only cover loans secured through Federal Programs.
The Sun Times has more details. I like the way so many news stories are focusing on the struggling first year prosecutor who makes a mid-40s salary range. What they don't explain is that these recent law school grads will gain valuable trial experience and within a few short years be making substantially more when they leave the public sector for private law firms. In return, the lawyers agree to commit to three years of service as a prosecutor or public defender.
According to the Sun-Times article:
Here are some statistics to consider from the US Department of Labor:
In 2004 the average annual earnings for all lawyers was $94,930
The average yearly earnings for a lawyer on the local government level $73,410
In other words, the sad stories Durbin feeds the media about starting salaries for prosecutors etc. just don't wash. A recent law school grad may find he has to budget quite a bit his first couple years in field in order to pay his loans, but soon he will break into a very comfortable living.
Just as an aside, this is similar to how liberals always tell us that we haven't raised the minimum wage in years, as if some poor sucker has been working at that level of pay for all that time with no hope of improvement. The reality is that minimum wage may be a starting wage and with the gain of experience and promotion, a worker can advance beyond that. Durbin is trying to make us think that these poor lawyers will struggle for years at their starting salary of $43,000 per year. That is dishonest.
Now, a quiz. Can you guess who comprise the top campaign contributors to Dick Durbin? (Hum the Final Jeopardy theme now...)
If you answered Law Firms, you are right.
According to Open Secrets law firms have been very generous to good old Dick. These law firms were in the top ten of Durbin Contributors during the last election cycle:
Kirkland & Ellis: $56,724
Simmons Cooper LLC: $37,685
Baron & Budd: $36,500
Corboy & Demetrio: $32,650
Thornton & Naumes: $31,400
Sidley Austin LLP: $24,700
Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal: $22,550
Waters & Kraus: $21,000
Grand Total: $263,209
Eight of Dick's top ten contributors were law firms. All of the top 6 were.
According to Open Secrets Top Industries Breakdown Durbin's single largest source for contributions was Lawyers, who gave him $1,281,219. No other industry contributed more to Dick. In fact, the second highest industry was Securities & Investment with a paltry $214,300. No wonder Dick is so worried about struggling lawyers.
Well, with his party poised to take control of the Senate, Durbin may be able to finally pass legislation aimed to help the neediest among us; that's right, help is on the way for...LAWYERS!
You heard it right folks, Durbin has been trying for years to pass a GI Bill for Lawyers. In legislation he plans to re-introduce next year, Durbin plans to give up to $10,000 per year to lawyers who work in the public sector to help pay off their student loans.
I'm so happy I won't need to lose sleep anymore worrying about how lawyers are going to manage their student loan debt. Under the "Prosecutors and Defenders Initiative Act" there will be a cap of $60,000 and the program will only cover loans secured through Federal Programs.
The Sun Times has more details. I like the way so many news stories are focusing on the struggling first year prosecutor who makes a mid-40s salary range. What they don't explain is that these recent law school grads will gain valuable trial experience and within a few short years be making substantially more when they leave the public sector for private law firms. In return, the lawyers agree to commit to three years of service as a prosecutor or public defender.
According to the Sun-Times article:
"We're hoping now with the change of leadership in the Senate, we can get this enacted," said Durbin, who will be the assistant majority leader come January. "It's the highest priority."
Here are some statistics to consider from the US Department of Labor:
In 2004 the average annual earnings for all lawyers was $94,930
The average yearly earnings for a lawyer on the local government level $73,410
In other words, the sad stories Durbin feeds the media about starting salaries for prosecutors etc. just don't wash. A recent law school grad may find he has to budget quite a bit his first couple years in field in order to pay his loans, but soon he will break into a very comfortable living.
Just as an aside, this is similar to how liberals always tell us that we haven't raised the minimum wage in years, as if some poor sucker has been working at that level of pay for all that time with no hope of improvement. The reality is that minimum wage may be a starting wage and with the gain of experience and promotion, a worker can advance beyond that. Durbin is trying to make us think that these poor lawyers will struggle for years at their starting salary of $43,000 per year. That is dishonest.
Now, a quiz. Can you guess who comprise the top campaign contributors to Dick Durbin? (Hum the Final Jeopardy theme now...)
If you answered Law Firms, you are right.
According to Open Secrets law firms have been very generous to good old Dick. These law firms were in the top ten of Durbin Contributors during the last election cycle:
Kirkland & Ellis: $56,724
Simmons Cooper LLC: $37,685
Baron & Budd: $36,500
Corboy & Demetrio: $32,650
Thornton & Naumes: $31,400
Sidley Austin LLP: $24,700
Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal: $22,550
Waters & Kraus: $21,000
Grand Total: $263,209
Eight of Dick's top ten contributors were law firms. All of the top 6 were.
According to Open Secrets Top Industries Breakdown Durbin's single largest source for contributions was Lawyers, who gave him $1,281,219. No other industry contributed more to Dick. In fact, the second highest industry was Securities & Investment with a paltry $214,300. No wonder Dick is so worried about struggling lawyers.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Feeling Safer?
Democrats campaigned in part on the claim that Bush's War on Terror had made America less safe. Now that they are in power, one would think that they were going to work to rectify that and make us safer. But Nancy Pelosi is going to work to make it harder for our law enforcement officials to search the number one group that is involved in terrrorist attacks. In the name of tolerance she and her party want to further hobble our efforts to stop terrorists before they kill innocent people.
Check out Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch on
Hot Air's Vent. This is genuinely scary stuff folks. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (with numerous ties to terrorist organizations), Pelosi and her fellow Democrats, including incoming Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison, of Minnesota. Ellison was heavily funded by CAIR, and is to be the key speaker at an upcoming CAIR banquet. At Ellison's victory rally, supporters shouted "Allahu Akbar!"
You must watch this Vent and see how CAIR is gaining influence in the halls of our Congress at this cruicial moment in our history. And, you must ask yourself if this is acceptable given that former and current leaders of CAIR have expressed a desire to see Islam become the dominant force in American life. Watch it now!
UPDATE: Article on the same topic by Spencer at Human Events with some good links.
UPDATE (11/17/06): According to This post at Jihad Watch Congressman Ellison will not speak at the CAIR Banquet after all.
Check out Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch on
Hot Air's Vent. This is genuinely scary stuff folks. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (with numerous ties to terrorist organizations), Pelosi and her fellow Democrats, including incoming Muslim Congressman, Keith Ellison, of Minnesota. Ellison was heavily funded by CAIR, and is to be the key speaker at an upcoming CAIR banquet. At Ellison's victory rally, supporters shouted "Allahu Akbar!"
You must watch this Vent and see how CAIR is gaining influence in the halls of our Congress at this cruicial moment in our history. And, you must ask yourself if this is acceptable given that former and current leaders of CAIR have expressed a desire to see Islam become the dominant force in American life. Watch it now!
UPDATE: Article on the same topic by Spencer at Human Events with some good links.
UPDATE (11/17/06): According to This post at Jihad Watch Congressman Ellison will not speak at the CAIR Banquet after all.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Connecticut Church Goes Dhimmi
Sometimes people so desperately want to believe something that it is very easy to convince them. Such is the case with the congregation of Sommers Congregational Church according to the Hartford Courant.
You see, the Rev. Barry Cass, wanted to open the minds of his church members as to what Islam believes. So he hired an Imam to speak to his congregation. With a bit of humor and a lot of lies the Imam tried to convince them that Islam is not much different from their faith and the violence associated it was unacceptable but understandable nonetheless.
Imam Abdullah Antepli, the head of Hartford Seminary's Islamic chaplaincy program gave the presentation to about 100 church members in a talk one member described as "sort of a revelation."
But, if the news story is accurate, what church goers got was a lot of fluff and deception. Take for example what the good Imam said when asked about violence and suicide bombing:
Okay, first he uses a diversionary tactic. The Imam says Islam does not tolerate murder and suicide. What he doesn't tell his audience is that in the doctrine of jihad, killing what we consider innocent people is not murder. Furthermore, suicide while in the act of killing infidels is not considered suicide.
Then, after telling his lie he goes on to excuse violence just the same because Muslims feel offended. He first offers the old Koran flushing at Gitmo story, something that never even happened. Either the Imam is ignorant of the truth or he is outright lying (you can put my money on the latter).
But, assuming it was true, I could understand the outrage, but not the killing and rioting. Buddy, my religion is abused, misquoted, denied, ridiculed and mocked constantly. Sometimes it really irks me, but I don't go on a mad spree of violence. No, I don't, because my faith teaches that such things are wrong, and that I should love my enemy and bless those who persecute me.
The Imam's attempt to pull the wool over this congregation's eyes falls apart, because Judaism and Christianity seldom results in violent reactions to both real and imagined offenses.
Furthermore, extremist Muslims don't need to wait for an offense, non-Muslims, or even the wrong sorts of Muslims living in an Islamic society expect violence as a regular part of life. Need some examples? Try this, this, and this,
I wonder what the Imam would have to say about this story in the Guardian. It seems a 15 year old boy was abducted, stabbed repeatedly then burned by Pakistani immigrants in Scotland. Of course,the story does not mention that the killers were Muslims, in fact it refers to the savages as "Asians" in the most PC of ways.
Sadly, the members of Sommers Congregational Church learned very little about Islam, they only learned what they wanted to hear to comfort them, and the Imam was happy to oblige.
You see, the Rev. Barry Cass, wanted to open the minds of his church members as to what Islam believes. So he hired an Imam to speak to his congregation. With a bit of humor and a lot of lies the Imam tried to convince them that Islam is not much different from their faith and the violence associated it was unacceptable but understandable nonetheless.
Imam Abdullah Antepli, the head of Hartford Seminary's Islamic chaplaincy program gave the presentation to about 100 church members in a talk one member described as "sort of a revelation."
But, if the news story is accurate, what church goers got was a lot of fluff and deception. Take for example what the good Imam said when asked about violence and suicide bombing:
Though Antepli was quick to clarify that the Islam faith does not tolerate murder or suicide, he explained why the actions of some have infuriated Muslims.
For example, news agencies reported claims last year that an interrogator at Guantanamo prison had flushed a Koran down a toilet. The reports sparked protests and deadly riots across the Islamic world.
To Muslims, Antepli said, the Koran is as sacred as Jesus is to Christians.
"You can understand how deeply affected they were," he said. "You can understand the outrage."
Okay, first he uses a diversionary tactic. The Imam says Islam does not tolerate murder and suicide. What he doesn't tell his audience is that in the doctrine of jihad, killing what we consider innocent people is not murder. Furthermore, suicide while in the act of killing infidels is not considered suicide.
Then, after telling his lie he goes on to excuse violence just the same because Muslims feel offended. He first offers the old Koran flushing at Gitmo story, something that never even happened. Either the Imam is ignorant of the truth or he is outright lying (you can put my money on the latter).
But, assuming it was true, I could understand the outrage, but not the killing and rioting. Buddy, my religion is abused, misquoted, denied, ridiculed and mocked constantly. Sometimes it really irks me, but I don't go on a mad spree of violence. No, I don't, because my faith teaches that such things are wrong, and that I should love my enemy and bless those who persecute me.
The Imam's attempt to pull the wool over this congregation's eyes falls apart, because Judaism and Christianity seldom results in violent reactions to both real and imagined offenses.
Furthermore, extremist Muslims don't need to wait for an offense, non-Muslims, or even the wrong sorts of Muslims living in an Islamic society expect violence as a regular part of life. Need some examples? Try this, this, and this,
I wonder what the Imam would have to say about this story in the Guardian. It seems a 15 year old boy was abducted, stabbed repeatedly then burned by Pakistani immigrants in Scotland. Of course,the story does not mention that the killers were Muslims, in fact it refers to the savages as "Asians" in the most PC of ways.
Sadly, the members of Sommers Congregational Church learned very little about Islam, they only learned what they wanted to hear to comfort them, and the Imam was happy to oblige.
Genderally Speaking
Yesterday I posted about New York City's gender swapping plan. I still believe that this will be the left's solution to the gay marriage debate. Conservatives are going to need to catch up on this, because even if our states define marriage as between a man and a woman, we are going to have to state clearly in the law a definition of what constitutes a man and what constitutes a woman.
I also mentioned the possibility of people changing gender at will to qualify for benefits. I meant it as humor, but in the UK it has happened already. Personnel Times has the story about how many men who have switched their identity to female will now qualify for state pensions five years before their peers who stayed male.
It baffles the imagination how utterly convoluted the left has become and how utterly they mean to remake society in their twisted image.
Transexuals in Italy are pushing for the same law. This is not about individual freedom or privacy. This is about a very tiny minority forcing the majority to make concessions to legitimize their perversions. They hold nothing sacred, not traditional marriage, not simple manners, not even nature. For all their talk of keeping the state out of our bedrooms and "keeping your laws off my body," they sure seem ready to use the power of the state to further their agenda and attack every vestige of the traditional social building blocks of our culture. If we're not careful there won't be a Western Civilization left to defend when threats like terrorism rear their ugly heads.
A Scottish Priest has stated it well: The family constituted by parents, a man and woman married to each other, and their offspring, has been the basic cell of society in pre-Christian, Christian and non-Christian cultures for millennia. Until now.
God help us.
I also mentioned the possibility of people changing gender at will to qualify for benefits. I meant it as humor, but in the UK it has happened already. Personnel Times has the story about how many men who have switched their identity to female will now qualify for state pensions five years before their peers who stayed male.
It baffles the imagination how utterly convoluted the left has become and how utterly they mean to remake society in their twisted image.
Transexuals in Italy are pushing for the same law. This is not about individual freedom or privacy. This is about a very tiny minority forcing the majority to make concessions to legitimize their perversions. They hold nothing sacred, not traditional marriage, not simple manners, not even nature. For all their talk of keeping the state out of our bedrooms and "keeping your laws off my body," they sure seem ready to use the power of the state to further their agenda and attack every vestige of the traditional social building blocks of our culture. If we're not careful there won't be a Western Civilization left to defend when threats like terrorism rear their ugly heads.
A Scottish Priest has stated it well: The family constituted by parents, a man and woman married to each other, and their offspring, has been the basic cell of society in pre-Christian, Christian and non-Christian cultures for millennia. Until now.
God help us.
A Story You'll Never Read In Real Life
Wouldn't it be refreshing to open your paper and see the following story? (But don't hold your breath!)
Pelosi Passes Over Party Peers In Fight Against Corruption
Washington: In a bold and surprising move, soon to be Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), announced that since voters responded positively to the Democrat's "culture of corruption" campaign theme, she was going to make good on the rhetoric by passing over several key Democrats who were thought to be in line for committee chairmanships in the next Congress.
"We meant what we said when we vowed to fight corruption," said Pelosi in a press conference in the Rotunda on Friday. "That means we need to clean our own house as we prepare to clean up the House of Representatives."
The Democrats hammered Republicans throughout the recent election campaign over a number of scandals including allegations in the Jack Abramoff influence peddling scandal and the response of Republican leaders to the Mark Foley incident involving sexually explicit messages with a male Congressional Page.
Following up on the Abramoff situation, Pelosi vowed to appoint chairmen who were not associated with that particular scandal. That announcement led to speculation by some party officials that some Democrats would be passed over. Among those in line for chairmanships that may now be threatened due to ties to Abramoff is New York Representative Charles Rangel, who appears to be in line for control of the House Ways and Means Committee. Rangel took in excess of $30,000 from Abramoff and clients of his firm. Rangel received more contributions from Abramoff and his clients than any other Democratic Lawmaker except Patty Murray of Washington who received in excess of $40,000.
There was also speculation that Bennie Thompson of Mississippi might see his appointment to the Committee on Homeland Security evaporate due to his ties to Abramoff, although Thompson received substantially less from the convicted lobbyist than Rangel.
Barney Frank, of Massachusetts was considered in line for Chairmanships of the House Financial Services Committee, but he too has ties to Abramoff, accepting about $9,000 from Abramoff's clients, the Choctaw Band of Mississippi.
Frank has also been implicated in a number of other scandals, most notably his involvement with male prostitute Steve Gobie. Frank paid for Gobie's services in 1985 and soon became quite close to the prostitute. Frank used his influence to help Gobie clear his record of outstanding parking tickets. Those were the least of Gobie's legal problems as he had prior convictions for cocaine, oral sodomy and the "production of obscene items involving a juvenile." Gobie moved in with the Congressman and eventually began operating a gay prostitution ring from the Washington, D.C. apartment.
Frank had denied knowledge of the prostitution ring, but was censured by the House after a move to expel him failed (only 2 Democrats voted to expel the Congressman). "In light of the issue made during the campaign of the Foley scandal," said one source close to Pelosi, "it seems that if Frank is allowed to keep his seat, he should at least be prevented from a chairmanship." Following the Foley matter, in which the Florida Representative was forced to resign, some conservatives accused the Democrats of hypocrisy in allowing members of their party to remain in office following similar scandals in the past.
Frank's troubles don't end there. The Congressman also was late in filing paperwork for trips funded by special interest groups, including the gay right's Family Pride Coalition. Frank also took a trip to China funded by the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs, an arm of the Chinese Communist Government.
Florida's Alcee Hastings may also see his expected chairmanship threatened. Earlier speculation indicated that Pelosi would pass over California's Jane Harman for control of the Intelligence Committee due to her knowledge of US surveillance programs related to the War on Terror. Many Democrats have ridiculed Harman due to her failure to criticise the program which many liberals consider a violation of civil liberties. But Hastings is a former Federal Judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from office in 1989. Hastings was convicted for perjury and for conspiracy to obtain a bribe. Hastings was only the sixth Federal Judge in the nation's history to be convicted of an impeachable offense. An unnamed source, reputed to be close to Pelosi claimed that "to give Hastings a chairmanship would make our whole campaign look like hypocrisy."
Pelosi Passes Over Party Peers In Fight Against Corruption
Washington: In a bold and surprising move, soon to be Speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), announced that since voters responded positively to the Democrat's "culture of corruption" campaign theme, she was going to make good on the rhetoric by passing over several key Democrats who were thought to be in line for committee chairmanships in the next Congress.
"We meant what we said when we vowed to fight corruption," said Pelosi in a press conference in the Rotunda on Friday. "That means we need to clean our own house as we prepare to clean up the House of Representatives."
The Democrats hammered Republicans throughout the recent election campaign over a number of scandals including allegations in the Jack Abramoff influence peddling scandal and the response of Republican leaders to the Mark Foley incident involving sexually explicit messages with a male Congressional Page.
Following up on the Abramoff situation, Pelosi vowed to appoint chairmen who were not associated with that particular scandal. That announcement led to speculation by some party officials that some Democrats would be passed over. Among those in line for chairmanships that may now be threatened due to ties to Abramoff is New York Representative Charles Rangel, who appears to be in line for control of the House Ways and Means Committee. Rangel took in excess of $30,000 from Abramoff and clients of his firm. Rangel received more contributions from Abramoff and his clients than any other Democratic Lawmaker except Patty Murray of Washington who received in excess of $40,000.
There was also speculation that Bennie Thompson of Mississippi might see his appointment to the Committee on Homeland Security evaporate due to his ties to Abramoff, although Thompson received substantially less from the convicted lobbyist than Rangel.
Barney Frank, of Massachusetts was considered in line for Chairmanships of the House Financial Services Committee, but he too has ties to Abramoff, accepting about $9,000 from Abramoff's clients, the Choctaw Band of Mississippi.
Frank has also been implicated in a number of other scandals, most notably his involvement with male prostitute Steve Gobie. Frank paid for Gobie's services in 1985 and soon became quite close to the prostitute. Frank used his influence to help Gobie clear his record of outstanding parking tickets. Those were the least of Gobie's legal problems as he had prior convictions for cocaine, oral sodomy and the "production of obscene items involving a juvenile." Gobie moved in with the Congressman and eventually began operating a gay prostitution ring from the Washington, D.C. apartment.
Frank had denied knowledge of the prostitution ring, but was censured by the House after a move to expel him failed (only 2 Democrats voted to expel the Congressman). "In light of the issue made during the campaign of the Foley scandal," said one source close to Pelosi, "it seems that if Frank is allowed to keep his seat, he should at least be prevented from a chairmanship." Following the Foley matter, in which the Florida Representative was forced to resign, some conservatives accused the Democrats of hypocrisy in allowing members of their party to remain in office following similar scandals in the past.
Frank's troubles don't end there. The Congressman also was late in filing paperwork for trips funded by special interest groups, including the gay right's Family Pride Coalition. Frank also took a trip to China funded by the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs, an arm of the Chinese Communist Government.
Florida's Alcee Hastings may also see his expected chairmanship threatened. Earlier speculation indicated that Pelosi would pass over California's Jane Harman for control of the Intelligence Committee due to her knowledge of US surveillance programs related to the War on Terror. Many Democrats have ridiculed Harman due to her failure to criticise the program which many liberals consider a violation of civil liberties. But Hastings is a former Federal Judge who was impeached, convicted and removed from office in 1989. Hastings was convicted for perjury and for conspiracy to obtain a bribe. Hastings was only the sixth Federal Judge in the nation's history to be convicted of an impeachable offense. An unnamed source, reputed to be close to Pelosi claimed that "to give Hastings a chairmanship would make our whole campaign look like hypocrisy."
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
The Gay Lobby's "Plan B"
Tonight the voters in 7 states will go to the polls to decide the issue of same sex marriage in their states (Colorado voters will decide twice). If the past is any guide, most will vote to protect traditional marriage. That may be a good sign, but in the long run, it won't matter.
The gay lobby, like most of the left wing, has a backup plan for what to do when they lose at the ballot box. Yes, the liberals are for the people but when the people disagree with them, they are quick to find another way to get what they want and tell the people to stick it.
Marriage protection has focused thus far on defining marriage in a particular jurisdiction as a union between a man and a woman. But the gay lobby has found a loophole, there is no definition of man and woman.
That's right, if they can't win same sex marriage, they will work to redefine gender itself.
The New York Times (reg. required) carried the story today that the New York City Board of Health was considering making it legal for anyone born in the city to choose to change their gender on their birth certificate even without surgery to physically alter their sex.
Yup,you knew it had to happen sooner or later. Born with a penis but want to be a woman? Simply apply for the change and viola, your birth certificate now shows you to be a woman, anatomy be damned! Born a woman, want to be a man? Done.
So, even if marriage is defined by law as a man-woman union, a man can simply declare himself a woman and his marriage is legal.
Years ago, the gay lobby assured us that their movement was all about what consenting adults could do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. But the lie is revealed now. Their movement is about forcing a new paradigm on the entire society. Every perversion is now normal and every pathology is to be celebrated. In fact, normal no longer exists, instead we have diversity of normalcy.
It's now about them defining your relationship with your spouse. It's about you being forced to acknowledge their "private life" as virtuous.
Mark my words, other perversions will follow, when personal choice becomes the basis of what marriage should be, then how can we stop polygamy and incest from being granted legal sanction. "Don't be ridiculous," you protest? Well, did you ever think you would see us actually debating if anatomy should determine your gender?
Remember the old life of Brian film from Monty Python?
There you have it, comedy has become a sad pathetic fact of our political life. If you have been on the fence about the gay rights movement, or should we say the GLBT movement, its time you wake up and face the fact that this is not about consenting adults, etc. etc. This is about remaking our entire society, the family itself into the vision hatched in the dark minds of some of the most deranged among us. And other perversions are sure to follow.
But, hey, let's look for the silver lining. I've been told, and often felt, I was born in the wrong era. I think as a transera individual I would like my birth certificate to read that I was born in the 1930s. That makes me eligible for social security benefits; which is great because I sure as heck won't ever see any benefits when my chronological age reaches that point. But after all, isn't the actual calendar year in which one was born a rather arbitrary method for determining age.
Can I also change my race? Country of origin? This could be great, let me just change my kids' information too so that they will be eligible for more programs, scholarships and quotas when it comes time for college and the workplace.
I could author a new text book that could become mandatory in future kindergarten classrooms: Jessica Had Two Mommies, But One Of Them Is Now Her Daddy, Except That Now Jessica Wants To Be A Boy Named Tyler And Is Himself A Mommy Of A Child Named Sven Who Has Yet To Find Comfort In His/Her Own Gender Identity.
Oh, and if I am anatomically male, but identify as female, I can now use that deodorant that is "strong enough for a man but made for a woman" and you can't stop me!
By the way, there is more on this sick development at:
Hot Air
NY 1
The gay lobby, like most of the left wing, has a backup plan for what to do when they lose at the ballot box. Yes, the liberals are for the people but when the people disagree with them, they are quick to find another way to get what they want and tell the people to stick it.
Marriage protection has focused thus far on defining marriage in a particular jurisdiction as a union between a man and a woman. But the gay lobby has found a loophole, there is no definition of man and woman.
That's right, if they can't win same sex marriage, they will work to redefine gender itself.
The New York Times (reg. required) carried the story today that the New York City Board of Health was considering making it legal for anyone born in the city to choose to change their gender on their birth certificate even without surgery to physically alter their sex.
Yup,you knew it had to happen sooner or later. Born with a penis but want to be a woman? Simply apply for the change and viola, your birth certificate now shows you to be a woman, anatomy be damned! Born a woman, want to be a man? Done.
So, even if marriage is defined by law as a man-woman union, a man can simply declare himself a woman and his marriage is legal.
Joann Prinzivalli, 52, a lawyer for the New York Transgender Rights Organization, a man who has lived as a woman since 2000, without surgery, said the changes amount to progress, a move away from American culture's misguided fixation on genitals as the basis for one's gender identity.The diversity of nature is such that this guy/girl is one sick piece of work! And the left tries to claim that the conservatives are anti-science on the embryonic stem cell issue. This one can't even figure out basic biology.
"It's based on an arbitrary distinction that says there are two and only two sexes," she said. "In reality the diversity of nature is such that there are more than just two, and people who seem to belong to one of the designated sexes may really belong to the other."
Years ago, the gay lobby assured us that their movement was all about what consenting adults could do in the privacy of their own bedrooms. But the lie is revealed now. Their movement is about forcing a new paradigm on the entire society. Every perversion is now normal and every pathology is to be celebrated. In fact, normal no longer exists, instead we have diversity of normalcy.
It's now about them defining your relationship with your spouse. It's about you being forced to acknowledge their "private life" as virtuous.
Mark my words, other perversions will follow, when personal choice becomes the basis of what marriage should be, then how can we stop polygamy and incest from being granted legal sanction. "Don't be ridiculous," you protest? Well, did you ever think you would see us actually debating if anatomy should determine your gender?
Remember the old life of Brian film from Monty Python?
Stan: I want to be one.
Reg, Francis: What?
Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me "Loretta".
Reg: Wha'?
Loretta: It's my right as a man.
Judith: Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
Loretta: I want to have babies.
Reg: You want to have babies?!
Loretta: It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg: But... you can't have babies.
Loretta: Don't you oppress me!
Reg: I'm not oppressing you, Stan, you haven't got a womb! Where's the fetus gonna gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?
[Stan/Loretta starts to cry.]
Judith: Here! I-I've got an idea. Suppose that you agree that he can't actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans', but that he can have the right to have babies.
Francis: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister, sorry.
Reg: Wh-what's the point?
Francis: Wha'?
Reg: What's the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can't have babies?
Francis: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
Reg: It's symbolic of his struggle against reality.
There you have it, comedy has become a sad pathetic fact of our political life. If you have been on the fence about the gay rights movement, or should we say the GLBT movement, its time you wake up and face the fact that this is not about consenting adults, etc. etc. This is about remaking our entire society, the family itself into the vision hatched in the dark minds of some of the most deranged among us. And other perversions are sure to follow.
But, hey, let's look for the silver lining. I've been told, and often felt, I was born in the wrong era. I think as a transera individual I would like my birth certificate to read that I was born in the 1930s. That makes me eligible for social security benefits; which is great because I sure as heck won't ever see any benefits when my chronological age reaches that point. But after all, isn't the actual calendar year in which one was born a rather arbitrary method for determining age.
Can I also change my race? Country of origin? This could be great, let me just change my kids' information too so that they will be eligible for more programs, scholarships and quotas when it comes time for college and the workplace.
I could author a new text book that could become mandatory in future kindergarten classrooms: Jessica Had Two Mommies, But One Of Them Is Now Her Daddy, Except That Now Jessica Wants To Be A Boy Named Tyler And Is Himself A Mommy Of A Child Named Sven Who Has Yet To Find Comfort In His/Her Own Gender Identity.
Oh, and if I am anatomically male, but identify as female, I can now use that deodorant that is "strong enough for a man but made for a woman" and you can't stop me!
By the way, there is more on this sick development at:
Hot Air
NY 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
