Kulterkrieg

Recently, the judges of the 9^th Circuit ruled that a war memorial cross was unconstitutional due to the separation of church and state. However, Islam, Summum, and a host of other evil or strange religions have been protected by the government, and even been ruled as part of it. For example, the United States government won’t allow the Ten Commandments to be shown in our court buildings, though that is what our legal system was founded on. But courts have recently ruled that Sharia law must remain part of our legal system, though last time I checked we weren’t an Islamic state.

            The first question I have concerning the recent federal court decision is: what are we going to do with all those little white crosses in Arlington cemetery? Crosses are used as a way to remember the dead and mark their burial site. The use of memorial crosses is not a surreptitiously organized conspiracy by Christians across the country, yet judges are actually deciding cases concerning it. Yet these judges are releasing Muslim terrorist recruiters living in America on bail, even after they bite and assault FBI agents. These judges need better clerks to organize their priorities. A cross in a cemetery won’t kill you, terrorist suspects very well might.

Joe Infranco of the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian legal group, stated in response to hearing the decision in this case, that “the memory of those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom shouldn't be dishonored because the ACLU finds a small number of people who are merely offended.” I agree whole heartedly, because lots of things offend me, but I can’t do a thing about that. Hell, building a center with a mosque in it near ground zero offends me, as does allowing Muslims to beat their wives because of their religion (S.D. v. M.J.R., 2010), but most judges would just ignore my complaints. And what about the Korean War veterans, do their feelings not get taken into consideration. If American war veterans want a cross, how can a minority tell them they can’t have it? What has that minority done for the country?

But crosses are not the only thing being targeted. The Christian, and sometimes also American, way of life is being threatened. This is because of the kulturkrieg – culture war – led by the Muslim, Summum, Atheist, and whack job minorities in this country.

When Germany’s Angela Merkel said, “those who don’t respect our values, don’t have a place here,” she was right. Well, the minorities in the United States do not want to join us or respect our values, so they’ve decided to try to beat us. They take us to court over long established traditions, while forcing their new radical culture on us. They justify their extreme beliefs in courts built on Christian values. The United States federal government recently sued a Chicago school for refusing to grant a Muslim teacher unpaid leave to take a trip to Mecca for the Hajj. The contract the teacher signed did not provide for extra vacation days, but the government said that they had to give in to her demands anyways. However, if I wanted to take a trip to Cumorah, a Mormon holy site, I’m fairly certain that the federal government would not fight a legal battle on my behalf. If a Catholic teacher wanted to go to Rome to see the Pope, I doubt the ACLU attorneys would get outraged and call dozens of press conferences.

Outside of court, minorities use their status as a growing minority to change our way of life. Movie producers, CEOs, and other people are afraid to honor God, because they don’t want to offend customers, especially atheists and Muslims. Now some businesses have started catering to Muslims, changing their menus and store schedules. McDonald’s and KFC both released Muslim friendly menus. Slaughterhouses have started to follow halal standards. Best Buy even recognized Eid al-Adha. This is unacceptable. These businesses are aiding the enemy in this kulturkrieg.

I pray to God the next round of federal judges are appointed under a conservative president, that Christians file more of their own suits, and that businesses recognize that appealing to a minority may not be such a good idea if you shun a large group of people in doing so.

The Unions Strike Back

Mitch Daniels (R – IN), the recently empowered Governor of Indiana, revoked public sector employees’ right to collective bargaining as soon as he took office. Other states have followed suit, the most recent being Wisconsin. In Wisconsin, protestors took to the capitol and Democrat lawmakers fled to Illinois so that the recent legislation could not be passed, as the remaining lawmakers cannot constitute a quorum. (At least with Rahm Emanuel in office the Democrats will have a hospitable place to stay in Chicago.)

            The public sector workers are different from private sector workers in that their boss is not some rich, monopoly seeking, tycoon that wants to pay his workers next to nothing for back breaking work. Public sector workers report to the government. (Yes, the government does have monopolies, but it is by no means rich.) If public sector jobs were so horrible as to need powerful unions to protect the workers, why are they so frequently sought? I don’t hear public sector workers complaining about unreasonable hours. And the benefits, well, those aren’t anything to complain about, either. Yet union workers have launched a continual string of protests across America. They claim they want the power to demand wages that they can live on. I don’t understand why they would need this power seeing that public sector employees start at around $26,000 for even the lowest of jobs; most of the jobs start around $35,000. This isn’t wage slavery.

But until now, the protests have been civil. Today, however, a Communication Workers of America assaulted Tabitha Hale, a conservative activist working for FreedomWorks. The attack occurred when she was filming the protestors outside of FreedomWorks’ office in DC. The mustached brute even had the audacity to say that the union way was “to get a little bloody.” (I guess he wasn’t kidding when he said he was going to strike). Of course, none of this was reported by mainstream – or liberal – news stations. Fox analysts did give Ms. Hale a voice, though, so her story did not go unreported. The crime, which is on video, will also not go unreported. I must entreat Ms. Hale to also seek legal action in civil court, because the assault must have been jarring and emotionally disturbing.

Liberal journalists and talk show hosts are fanning the flames as I write this. Daily Beast reporter Rick Outzen said about elderly Tea Party supporters – who he calls “teabaggers” – that the country was “just a few funerals away from a good government.” This came after an elderly Tea Party protester was beat by Irish-American union thugs during a rally in Boston. (Now we know why Democrats work so hard to help criminals avoid punishment.)

It is alarming that public service unions are this up in arms over something they clearly do not need. The only reason for fighting this hard, that I can think of, is that they like the extra cushion that our taxpayers’ dollars provides them. One thing, however, is clear – the unions will resort to violence to intimidate conservatives. I would not be surprised if Mitch Daniels wakes up tomorrow to find a dead fish on his front porch next to the morning paper.

Thug Video: http://michellemalkin.com/2011/02/23/video-cwa-union-thug-strikes-young-female-freedomworks-activist/

Priorities

The Jerusalem Reclamation Project, which promotes the settlement of Arab and Palestinian areas, recently hosted possible 2012 presidential candidate Mike Huckabee. While he was there, he told his Israeli audience that international criticism should not deter them from building settlements in East Jerusalem because it is Israel’s “eternal capital.” He stated that they have the right to build anywhere in “the place that God gave them.” President Obama, on the other hand, has called the settlements illegal; an opprobrious stance for the President of the United States to take.

            Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently denounced the destruction of the Shepherd Hotel, former residence of the grand mufti of Jerusalem. The Palestinians blow up buses and check points, killing dozens of Jewish people, but Hillary Clinton wants to condemn the Israelis for demolishing a vacant building. After hearing of Secretary Clinton’s rebuke, Huckabee stated, "I think we ought to be more concerned about Iran building bombs than Israelis building bedrooms." He is right in his reasoning – the United States should get its priorities straight.

            According to Israeli intelligence, Iran is just three years away from having a nuclear bomb capable of reaching the West. Pakistan and North Korea already have nuclear missiles, so the United States should be focused on preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear capability. With Iraq out of the way, Iran is the only Middle Eastern country remaining in the Axis of Evil, but Ahmadinejad has been gaining support in recent years, especially from terrorist organizations like Hezbollah. Iran’s power is waxing and it does not look ready to stop. The recent unrest has visibly altered the political landscape and when the dust settles Iran may have even more allies. The balance of power is shifting and we need to apply enough pressure to keep it tilted in our favor.

It is not just up to the United States, though. As the first line of defense against Iran, Israel has a responsibility to use the materials we have given them to execute their duties in protecting Judeo-Christian nations from Islamofascist countries. In 1981, Israel used F-16 fighter jets to lead an air raid on Iraq’ Osirak Nuclear Reactor, preventing Saddam from gaining nuclear weapons. This raid’s codename was Operation Opera. I’m now calling for Operation Encore – an Israeli air strike, sanctioned by NATO, on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Preventative measures like this must be taken; preemptive strikes are necessary in securing our safety. As the old adage goes, it’s better to be safe than sorry. Some worry about lack of concrete evidence, but I feel Israel needs to follow former Vice President Dick Cheney’s one percent doctrine, which states that “even if there's just a one percent chance of the unimaginable coming due, act as if it is a certainty… it’s about response.”

In addition to working on its nuclear program, Iran recently positioned war ships in the Red Sea, near the Suez Canal, in an attempt to provoke Israel. After learning of this, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said to a group of American Jewish leaders that the voyage “proves that the self-confidence and chutzpah of the Iranians are growing from day to day.” I must agree, which is why I support taking direct and decisive action against Iran. One can only pray that Mr. Lieberman and his right wing party – Yisrael Beiteinu – can become the majority in the Israeli government. Mr. Lieberman summed up his speech by saying, "To my regret, the international community is not showing readiness to deal with the recurring Iranian provocations.” I hope that we prove his assertion wrong by speaking up and showing that he has our support against this Iranian threat.

North Korea: A Nuisance

Now is the time to strike. North Korea has shown that it is the aggressor by attacking South Korea without any provocation. This calls for retaliation.

On November 23, 2010, North Korea shelled the island of Yeonpyeong of the coast of Incheon, South Korea, which is situated near North Korean waters. The shelling killed two marines, two civilians, and wounded sixteen others. The civilian population was evacuated to the mainland. Charred forests and nearly thirty destroyed buildings were left in the aftermath. On March 26 of this year, North Korea sunk the ROKS Cheonan with a torpedo, killing 46 seamen.

South Korea knows how it needs to respond to North Korea’s belligerent behavior. South Korea parliament member Yoo Seung Min stated, “The only solution is to deliver precise strikes on North Korean positions first through a massive air attack in the early stages of a war.” I agree wholeheartedly. At a rally in Seoul, veterans shredded and burned North Korean flags and protested the North Korean leadership. One veteran, Kim Jin Gyu, said he felt that “[South Korea] should just smash [North Korea] up” in retaliation for the attacks, adding that he has “had enough.” The government should give the veterans what they want – I’m sure they would like to see victory before they die.

My friend, whose name I will not disclose, was shipped to Kunsan Air Base in South Korea two days after the attack by North Korea. The United States also sent the U.S.S. George Washington, a supercarrier, to South Korea. And the United States already has over 28,000 troops stationed in South Korea, so we’re prepared.

It was recently revealed that China has decided to stop backing North Korea if the situation escalates. A propitious turn of events, this means that North Korea would not have the support it had during the first Korean War. A weakened North Korea is a prime target for a South Korean and American counterattack.

North Korea has, however, provided Iran with improved ballistic missiles, strengthening a country that wants to destroy Israel and the United States. This signifies that North Korea still has at least one ally – an ally that is considered a threat and enemy of NATO. Helping Iran is practically declaring war on the United States and Israel. Just like Japan and Germany were allies during World War II, Iran and North Korea have united today. But this is yet another reason for the United States to attack; we have a pretext.

At the end of the day, North Korea has: 1.) killed South Korean civilians without provocation in a military strike; 2.) lost support from its strongest ally; and 3.) provided missiles to a country hell-bent on the destruction of Israel and the United States. I believe that South Korea and the United States would be fully justified in carpet bombing Pyongyang’s administrative buildings and all of the North Korea’s military bases. A joint invasion followed by a South Korean occupation and reconstruction would be a good plan to follow after the bombing. We have the chance to put an end to this illegitimate state that misleadingly calls itself the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, so let’s take it.

A Federal Placebo

            The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a placebo, a sugar coated pill to sedate the masses. When passing the PPAC, the Obama Administration announced “healthcare for everyone” like the United States was some utopia. The Department of Health and Humans Services claims that the overhaul strengthens Medicaid and provides health insurance coverage to everyone. That is not quite true.

            The healthcare overhaul does not “provide” health insurance to everyone; “requires” people to purchase health care insurance within the next four years or be subject to a penalty in accordance with Section 1501 of the PPAC. In response to this, insurance companies have increased their job-based coverage. This adversely affects businesses, as they now have to provide more expensive healthcare benefits to all employees. As a result, one organization attempted to bring the PPAC before the Supreme Court last week. The Pacific Justice Institute, in Baldwin v. Sebelius, 10-369, “objects to being compelled to comply with the act because the act imposed increased costs on it by preventing it from denying health care insurance coverage to part-time employees.” But not all businesses are facing this dilemma.

            The Department of Health and Human Services has granted waivers to over one hundred unions and companies since the healthcare bill was passed. Knowing the Obama Administration, I wouldn’t be surprised if the waivers were arbitrarily given to the unions and companies based on party ties – most unions contribute campaign funds to Democrats. Now that the Republicans have taken back the House of Representatives, the healthcare bill will undoubtedly come under strict scrutiny. Senator Mike Enzi (R – WY) has already revealed his intention to use the Congressional Review Act to hinder the implementation of “problematic” or vague sections of the PPAC.

            Now, to address the issue of strengthening Medicaid – it doesn’t work, so strengthening isn’t going to improve anything. Let me explain. Medicaid has turned to privately managed health care plans, like Healthcare USA, which attend to their profits more than to patient’s needs. USA Today recently reported a story about a woman who had to drive five hours to get therapy for her knee because the orthopedists in her area were not covered under her Healthcare USA plan. When she got a brace for her knee, Healthcare USA wouldn’t cover it. Healthcare USA and its competitors are shams. Unfortunately, it is predicted that the enrollment in these managed-care plans will increase by 30% due to the new healthcare law.

Starting next year, Republicans will have more authority in Congress. They are the majority in the House. They cannot be filibustered on the Senate floor. And after witnessing the federal and state-level onslaught, the Democrats will have to keep a low profile lest they anger more voters before next election. However, this regained authority will not allow the Republicans to eradicate the PPAC entirely, but maybe they can amend the bill or pass a new bill nullifying specific sections of the PPAC.

The Treachery of Considering Sharia Law

Last Tuesday, a controversial amendment to Oklahoma’s state constitution prohibiting state courts from considering Sharia law when deciding cases passed with an amazing 70 percent of the vote. Critics of the bill – Muslims and liberal bloggers – are calling the measure a pre-emptive strike. I must agree with them, that it is a pre-emptive strike, but that is exactly what the country needs. They are also saying that the bill is unnecessary, because Sharia law is not being considered by courts. This is a lie.

            In a recent New Jersey trial court decision, S.D. v. M.J.R., a judge applied Sharia law to a case of domestic abuse between a Muslim man and wife, ruling that the husband could not be held accountable for the rape of his wife under Sharia law. The judge reasoned that the defendant’s actions were “consistent with his [religious] practices.” If rape is a normal practice in a religion, then maybe the practice of that religion and the imposition of its laws should be prohibited.

In 2008, the immigrant couple were wed in Morocco in an arrange marriage. After coming to the United States, the husband began to pinch, beat, and rape his wife. The wife stated in court that she “felt he was enjoying hurting” her. Evidence was brought into the trial proving that the husband had told his wife, “You must do whatever I tell you to do. I want to hurt your flesh” and “this is according to our religion. You are my wife; I can do anything to you.” The defendant’s Imam testified that, under Sharia law, a wife cannot refuse her husband’s sexual advances. She apparently refused, so he raped her. As justification, he told her that, “I am doing [this] to correct you.” I hope our Department of Corrections does not apply these standards to the treatment of their women inmates, because I’m sure the ACLU would be all over the government if that was the case. Luckily this horrendous ruling was reversed by a New Jersey appellate court, so the Sharia victory was short lived.

It may not always be this way, though. Sharia law may be used as a standard in more courts if laws, like the measure in Oklahoma, are not passed to prevent it. These laws also need to be enacted immediately, as the Muslim in the presence in the legislature is likely to grow in the coming years. As of now, there are only two Muslim Representatives in Congress – Andre Carson (D – IN) and Keith Ellison (D – MN). This, however, could change with the growing Muslim population; therefore, it is paramount we thwart Muslims in their pursuits of political and legal power in America. In 2008, former U.S. Representative Virgil Goode (R – VA) stated that to avoid more Keith Ellisons from being elected, that we cannot allow “persons from the Middle East to come to this country.” I feel that he is right, because the less Muslim politicians, the least likely it will be that Sharia law is considered in American courts.

Judges have ruled in the past that prayer in school is an affront to the Constitution. But now they have ruled that adopting a religious law that promotes violence towards innocents is the correct way to proceed. And they are doing this while Muslim politicians are being elected in non-Islamic states. Laws prohibiting the consideration of Sharia law, the influx of more Muslim immigrants, and the spread of Islamic power are vital if we are to halt the perfidious spread of Sharia law into American law.

The Real American Express

This past Saturday, I attended the Republican Rally on campus. The rally was replete with refreshments, American flags, and great candidates. Of those candidates, one really enticed me with his speech. His name was Joe DioGuardi. A CPA that had been in Congress during President Reagan’s second term, Mr. DioGuardi was our lone, but well qualified, senatorial candidate at the rally. Halfway through his speech, he pulled out his Congressional voting card. He held up the card and said, “My friends, take a good look at this card. This is the Most Expensive Credit Card in the World.” He was right; the government increases the national debt without ever being held accountable.

After the rally had ended, I conversed with Mr. DioGuardi about reckless spending at the federal level and his time in office under Ronald Reagan. As he was leaving, he invited me and a few others back to his RV, where he gave us copies of his recently revised book Unaccountable Congress: It Doesn’t Add Up. I read the book as soon as I returned to my dorm room. It exposed the true extent of the national deficit – $56 trillion if Medicare and Social Security debts are included. That means each of us owes $569,330 because of the irresponsible spending of 535 individuals (I’m glad Mr. DioGuardi informed me of this). It also illuminated the problems with Congressional budgeting, spending, and accounting, touching on issues such as healthcare and Social Security. Mr. DioGuardi’s book allows the average citizen to see through the “smoke and mirrors” of the appropriations process.

Unaccountable Congress does an excellent job underscoring the contemptible Congressional budgeting processes and inadequately designed bailouts. However, I would like to focus on a matter mentioned in passing in “Chapter Six: A House of Ill Repute” that is plaguing every level of government – personal spending. Spending on personal luxuries has become a pastime of the members of Congress whom Mr. DioGuardi refers to as “spendaholics.” Nancy Pelosi is the latest culprit of this wasteful spending. Pelosi spent over two million taxpayers’ dollars in the past two years on travel expenses for her and her family. Thousands of dollars were spent on her expensive friends Jack Daniels and Johnny Walker. Fine dining also accounted for tens of thousands of tax dollars. This wasteful spending needs to stop.

Now, there may not be a company to cut Congress’s line of credit, but we the people can monitor its spending. Mr. DioGuardi’s organization, Truth in Government, exposes the poor budgeting and spending practices prevalent in Congress. The organization’s website, truthingovernment.org, is constantly being updated with the latest news and information concerning fiscal issues. The information shows why Social Security reform, which has been ignored for too long, is imperative. Why repealing Obama’s Healthcare Bill should be of a high priority.

If Congress continues to increase the national debt at the rate it has been, China will soon overtake us as the number one superpower. The threat that China poses is great, as their economy is irrefutably more stable than, and arguably as powerful as, ours. Social Security will be non-existent. Taxes will have to be increased to keep up with defense spending. The hazardous spending needs to stop. It is our job as citizens to pressure the lawmakers, especially those in Congress, to rein in the monstrous budget we are facing. If we don’t, the deficit will indisputably have terribly adverse results on future generations, including our own.