Leftwing Corruption of America good, Rightwing Values and Principals bad?

Has America Stopped Trying to Make Good People?

I find this relevant in today’s society based on the HATE-Mongers that I continually encounter on the internet. Granted some of this vitriol is from those that USE the net’s “Incognito” to spew their vileness of who they are inside. Corruption, Greed, Selfishness, Kickbacks, Bribes, Payoffs, Cloture; Lack of Morals, Ethics, Honor, especially in politics,  who rule today under “stealth Id’s” with NO HONOR.

The post below really sums it up and offers some insight into a world that I grew up with in an America that I used to know.

 

=====================================================

By Dennis Prager · Wednesday, December 16, 2009

The most important question any society must answer is:

How will we make good people?

That is the question Judeo-Christian values have grappled with. There are many and profound theological and practical differences between Judaism and Christianity. But in the American incarnation of Judeo-Christian values — and America is really the one civilization that developed an amalgamation of Jewish and Christian values — the emphasis has been on individual character.

One cannot make a good society if one does not begin with the arduous task of making good individuals. Both Judaism and Christianity begin with the premise that man is not basically good and therefore regard man’s nature as the root cause of evil.

This may sound basic and even obvious, but it is not. In the Western world since the Enlightenment, belief in the inherent goodness of human beings has taken over. This has resulted in an increasing neglect of character development because evil has come to be regarded not as emanating from human nature (which is essentially good) or from morally flawed individuals but from forces outside the individual — especially material ones. Thus, vast numbers of the best educated in the West have come to believe that “poverty causes crime.”

Now, while no one could possibly refute the argument that starving people will steal bread for their families (an act that is morally defensible), the argument that poverty causes crime posits that when poor people in America commit murder and other violent crimes, it is because they are poor.

This is irrational dogma, as much a matter of faith as any theological doctrine.

Two simple facts illustrate this:

  • First, the vast majority of poor people, in America and elsewhere, do not commit violent crimes.
  • Second, a large amount of crime is committed by the middle class and even by the wealthy.

Neither fact prompts the “poverty causes crime” believers to rethink their position.

They need to, not only because the poverty-causes-crime thesis is so demonstrably false, but because it prevents societies from making good people. When society blames evil on forces outside the individual rather than on the individuals who perpetrate evil, society will work to change those forces rather than work to improve the character of individuals. That is a key to understanding why the left constantly attempts to radically change society — how else make a better world?

Conservatives, on the other hand, believe that the way to “repair the world,” in the oft-used Hebrew phrase of those most concerned with “social justice,” is far less dramatic, far less revolutionary and far less macro-oriented. It is the laborious process of raising every generation from scratch with good values and self-discipline. Without both of these, individual goodness and therefore societal goodness is impossible.

That is why the most important question a society can ask is how to raise young people to be good adults.

American society, under the influence of the left, asks other questions: How do we make young people environmentally aware? How do we teach them to fight allegedly rampant racism, sexism, homophobia and xenophobia in society? How do we fight AIDS and breast cancer?

It is, of course, good to be environmentally aware, to fight AIDS and breast cancer, and to oppose bigotry. But before training young people to be social activists, they must first learn character traits — truth telling, financial honesty, humility, honoring parents and, above all, self-control. Before learning to fight society, people need to fight their own nature. The world is filled with activists of all varieties who are loathsome individuals. (I can vouch for that, I see it and fight it daily on the internet!)

In general, we would do well to be far more impressed with a young person who sits next to the less popular fat kid who is eating alone at lunch, who fights the class bully, who doesn’t cheat on tests and who refrains from drug use.

There is no federal budget, no Senate or House bill, no social policy, no health care fix that can do as much good as a society that is filled with decent people.

http://patriotpost.us/opinion/dennis-prager/2009/12/16/have-we-stopped-trying-to-make-good-people/

==============================================

—————————————————————————–

Related Posts:

https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/12/22/code-of-cloture-in-code-of-ethics-out/

Advertisements

Code of Cloture IN, Code of Ethics OUT!

Code of Ethics for U.S. Government Service

Adopted July 11, 1958

Resolved by the House of Representatives {the Senate concurring}, That it is the sense of the Congress that the following Code of Ethics should be adhered to by all Government employees, including officeholders.

CODE OF ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE

Any person in Government service should:

1. Put loyalty to the highest moral principals and to country above loyalty to Government persons, party, or department.

2. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.

3. Give a full day’s labor for a full day’s pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought.

4. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.

5. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties.

6. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.

7. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of his governmental duties.

8. Never use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means for making private profit.

9. Expose corruption wherever discovered.

10. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.

[Source: U.S. House of Representatives Ethics Committee]

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blethics.htm

Cash for Cloture Floor Speech: Sen. John Cornyn, TX


https://lisaintx.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/campaign-contributions-bribery/

Another Broken Treaty? IRS auctions off SD Sioux Tribal Land!

“The land is particularly valuable to the tribe because it has been designated as a site for construction of wind towers to generate electrical energy.”

IMO….I think this explains it very well, WHY the land was not put back into a trust and WHY it was sold! This is an outrage and a disgrace to break yet another Treaty to such a noble people. When do the LIES and GREED end? Who is in charge of the IRS? Oh yeah—Little Timmy Geitner, the TAX CHEAT!!!

God Bless The Sioux Tribe and grant them justice!

IRS sells SD Indian tribe’s land to settle debt

By CHET BROKAW (AP) – Dec 3, 2009

PIERRE, S.D. — The Internal Revenue Service on Thursday auctioned off a large swath of land owned by an impoverished Indian tribe to help pay off more than $3 million in back taxes, penalties and interest — a sale the tribe says is illegal under federal laws protecting Indian land.

The 7,100 acres, or 11 square miles, of Crow Creek Sioux tribal land in central South Dakota ranch sold for almost $2.6 million, less than the $4.6 million it was appraised at, said IRS spokeswoman Carrie Resch. She did not say who bought the land.

The tribe filed a lawsuit Monday in U.S. District court in Pierre seeking to block the sale. Judge Roberto A. Lange declined their request but promised to schedule a trial to hear the tribe’s arguments.

The land in question was part of the tribe’s original reservation established in an 1868 treaty, and was held by the federal government in a trust for the tribe. But it was eventually allotted to individual tribal members, who then sold it to non-Indians, putting it outside the tribe’s legal jurisdiction.

The tribe bought the ranch back in 1998 but the Bureau of Indian Affairs did not put the land back into trust, which would have protected it from seizure, Tribal Secretary Tommy Thompson said.

Tribal Chairman Brandon Sazue said he hopes the tax dispute can still be resolved in a way that allows the tribe to keep the land.

“It’s very disgraceful, very shameful. It’s devastating to us,” Sazue said after the auction. “Our land is never for sale.”

Lawyers said the tribe can purchase the land back during a 180-day redemption period, and the land will not change possession during that time. A trial is tentatively set for March 29-30, which is within the redemption period.

According to the lawsuit, the IRS was auctioning the land to recover more than $3.1 million in federal employment taxes owed by the tribe. The tribe didn’t pay the taxes because it was told, erroneously, by an official connected to the BIA that federally recognized tribes do not have to pay the taxes, according to the lawsuit.

The auction was unnecessary because the tribe is seeking a loan to pay off its tax bill, the lawsuit said.

The tribe contends the IRS cannot legally seize and sell the land because it is owned by Crow Creek Tribal Farms Inc., a corporation set up by the tribe that is not legally responsible for settling the tribe’s tax debts.

Members of the tribe have used the land and lived on it for a long time, according to the suit. “Members died and were buried on the land. Indeed, the lands were considered so important to the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe that the Tribe went into debt to acquire the land as part of its land consolidation effort to enlarge the Crow Creek Indian Reservation,” it contends.

The tribe also argues that the seizure is illegal because the land cannot be taken without congressional approval and the IRS has not followed a federal law requiring an environmental assessment of the sale’s impact.

The tribe’s lawyer, Mario Gonzalez of Rapid City, said the IRS action was unusual. “This is the only instance that I know of where the IRS has levied on tribally owned land on an Indian reservation.”

Resch, the IRS spokeswoman, said she could not comment on the tribe’s legal arguments because the IRS does not comment on pending litigation.

Thompson said the IRS should have negotiated with the tribe, and that the tax bill could have been paid from trust money held for the tribe by the federal government.

“I’m kind of upset and kind of furious with the IRS,” Thompson said.

The land is particularly valuable to the tribe because it has been designated as a site for construction of wind towers to generate electrical energy, Sazue and Thompson said.

Buffalo County, which encompasses the Crow Creek reservation, is consistently listed by the U.S. Census Bureau as one of the poorest counties in the nation. The Census Bureau reported that more than 39 percent of the county’s population lived in poverty in 2005, when the annual median household income was just $16,868. The county had a 20 percent unemployment rate in October, four times higher than the state average, according to the South Dakota Department of Labor.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hs4U0JXWKdiirCy4ZjXOJcFHVZagD9CC4C3G0

———————————————————————————————————-

——————————————————————————————————

http://issueswire.com/releases/CAN-DO/CROWCREEK/prweb3310674.htm

——————————————————————————————————

Read the Petition here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/CrowCrek/petition.html

Sign the Petition:

http://www.petitiononline.com/CrowCrek/petition-sign.html

——————————————————————————————

The government gives from one hand and another government department,  the IRS,  takes away with the other!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/12/08/national/main5937499.shtml

——————————————————————————————-

From the Movie Thunderheart with Val Kilmer

National Defense compromised by Chicago Mobsters?

Is our National Defense becoming more of a Political bargaining chip and even being used as blackmail? We already KNOW, that buying votes for healthcare Mary Landrieu  (D)LA, has already admitted to her $300 Million dollar BRIBERY to get her vote—now that was an expensive call girl! These may just be a few of the latest Chicago Mobster tactics that Al Capone would envy!

.

.

—————————————————————————————————————

LATEST Breaking News: 12-17-09

20 senators demand probe of health-care vote ‘threat’

Did White House say it would close Air Force base if Nelson didn’t play?

Twenty senators are demanding an investigation into reports the Obama administration threatened to close Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska if that state’s Democratic senator, Ben Nelson, didn’t join other Democrats in voting for health-care reform.

The group of 20, all Republicans, today called for a hearing in a letter to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., and the committee’s top Republican Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

Go here for more on this story—http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=119239

————————————————————————————————–

“Playing politics with our national security”

Michael Goldfarb reports on the tactics employed by the Obama Administration to get Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson’s healthcare vote.  In a word, it’s despicable:

According to a Senate aide, the White House is now threatening to put Nebraska’s Offutt Air Force Base on the BRAC list if Nelson doesn’t fall into line.

Offutt Air Force Base employs some 10,000 military and federal employees in Southeastern Nebraska. As our source put it, this is a “naked effort by Rahm Emanuel and the White House to extort Nelson’s vote.” They are “threatening to close a base vital to national security for what?” asked the Senate staffer.

Indeed, Offutt is the headquarters for US Strategic Command, the successor to Strategic Air Command, and not by accident. STRATCOM was located in the middle of the country for strategic reasons. Its closure would be a massive blow to the economy of the state of Nebraska, but it would also be another example of thisadministration playing politics with our national security.

http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2009/12/playing-politics-with-our-national-security.html

http://minx.cc/?post=295932

http://caveviews.blogs.com/cave_news/2009/12/nelson-faces-offutt-air-base-closure-unless-he-backs-obamacare.html

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/12/16/beck-goldfarb-treason/

An interesting link to the base:

Battelle has won a Defense Department contract for nearly $10 million to study methods for safeguarding the nation’s dams in the event of an outside attack. The work is the Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

http://atlanta.bizjournals.com/atlanta/othercities/columbus/stories/2009/09/07/daily30.html

USDA: Now in the tree and biofuel business? Property Owners Pay Attention!

Cap and Trade is nothing but a CONTROL GRAB by this incompetent and surreal collection of government officials!

In my opinion, the  truth is becoming more and more clear. The attack on private property ownership is slowly being revealed under the guise of “Our Carbon Foot-print”” for our Nation AND our food supply.  Monsanto gained power under the Reagan Administration and have created, what appears to be,  a monopoly on the seeds and crops that they produce. Now we have Tom Vilsack as Agriculture Secretary, who was not only an advocate of  GMO’s, but now also states that farm and pastureland should be converted to Trees or bio-fuel, further reducing our food supply. This will not only affect our national food availability for human consumption, but also for livestock and pets.

USDA chief says carbon bill won’t hurt farmland

By Charles Abbott

December 15, 2009WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack downplayed his own department’s analysis of U.S. climate legislation on Tuesday, saying “more current” studies do not foresee carbon-capturing trees taking over millions of acres of farmland.

Up to 59 million acres of pasture and cropland could be converted to woodland by 2050 under a cap-and-trade system, according to the Agriculture Department analysis. Trees, to control greenhouse gases, would be more lucrative than crops. (WHAT??? So now we can plan on a FOOD SHORTAGE to go along with the increase in taxes—I’m NOT okay with this, how about you?!)

If farmland shifts to trees, there would be smaller output of crops and livestock. Critics such as Nebraska Senator Mike Johanns say climate legislation means higher energy and feed prices “will likely drive many producers out of business.” (Critics? I would say the senator is speaking POWER OF TRUTH!)

“I think there are other models that are more current and complete, that might lead to significantly, and will be significantly, different conclusions,” said Vilsack when asked about the USDA study. “We think there can be improvements to the modeling that was used in the past.”

The USDA analysis was based on material from the Environmental Protection Agency. (Remember Lisa Jackson, head of EPA? She has based her findings on corrupt data!)

As an example, Vilsack pointed to a Nov 11 report by a University of Tennessee think tank that bioenergy crops could blossom under a cap-and-trade system and would not shift cropland to forests.

Agricultural economist Bruce McCarl of Texas A&M told a House Agriculture subcommittee on Dec 3 that if carbon offsets are not widely available, “the market would likely be restricted to increased demand for biofuel and bioelectricity feedstocks.”

USDA concluded 85 percent of the revenue from agricultural offsets for greenhouse gas emissions would arise from afforestation of pasture and cropland, if contracts paid at least $10 per ton of carbon that is captured.

The forestry offsets would be worth $3 billion a year, USDA estimated, while higher crop and livestock prices, due to less farmland, would add an average $20 billion a year to farm income.

There are 920 million acres of land in U.S. farms, with 325 million acres planted to field crops. The USDA analysis said at low carbon prices, tree-planting would occur mostly on pastureland. As prices rise, cropland would account for half, or more of the conversions.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/reuters/2009/12/15/2009-12-15T225003Z_01_N1567185_RTRIDST_0_CLIMATE-USA-FARM-UPDATE-1.html

—————————————————————————————————————–

Genetically Engineered Trees danger to worldwide forests

Below is more addressing this issue for those that wish to learn more, along with a report about our Land being used to secure our growing National debt.

World Food Supply under ATTACK?

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-158544


Our Land: Collateral for the National Debt

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-197641

======================================================

Lose your property for growing food?

Big Brother legislation could mean prosecution, fines up to $1 million

Posted: March 16, 2009 By Chelsea Schilling

Some small farms and organic food growers could be placed under direct supervision of the federal government under new legislation making its way through Congress. Food Safety Modernization Act  House Resolution 875, or the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009, was introduced by Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., in February. DeLauro’s husband, Stanley Greenburg, conducts research for Monsanto – the world’s leading producer of herbicides and genetically engineered seed.  DeLauro’s act has 39 co-sponsors and was referred to the House Agriculture Committee on Feb. 4.

It calls for the creation of a Food Safety Administration to allow the government to regulate food production at all levels – and even mandates property seizure, fines of up to $1 million per offense and criminal prosecution for producers, manufacturers and distributors who fail to comply with regulations. Michael Olson, host of the Food Chain radio show and author of “Metro Farm,” told WND the government should focus on regulating food production in countries such as China and Mexico rather than burdening small and organic farmers in the U.S. with overreaching regulations.  “We need somebody to watch over us when we’re eating food that comes from thousands and thousands of miles away. We need some help there,” he said. “But when food comes from our neighbors or from farmers who we know, we don’t need all of those rules. If your neighbor sells you something that is bad and you get sick, you are going to get your hands on that farmer, and that will be the end of it. It regulates itself.”

The legislation would establish the Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services “to protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring the safety of food, improving research on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security of food from intentional contamination, and for other purposes.”

Federal regulators will be tasked with ensuring that food producers, processors and distributors – both large and small prevent and minimize food safety hazards such as food-borne illnesses and contaminants such as bacteria, chemicals, natural toxins or manufactured toxicants, viruses, parasites, prions, physical hazards or other human pathogens.

Under the legislation’s broad wording, slaughterhouses, seafood processing plants, establishments that process, store, hold or transport all categories of food products prior to delivery for retail sale, farms, ranches, orchards, vineyards, aquaculture facilities and confined animal-feeding operations would be subject to strict government regulation.

Government inspectors would be required to visit and examine food production facilities, including small farms, to ensure compliance. They would review food safety records and conduct surveillance of animals, plants, products or the environment. “What the government will do is bring in industry experts to tell them how to manage all this stuff,” Olson said. “It’s industry that’s telling government how to set these things up. What it always boils down to is who can afford to have the most influence over the government. It would be those companies that have sufficient economies of scale to be able to afford the influence – which is, of course, industrial agriculture.”

Farms and food producers would be forced to submit copies of all records to federal inspectors upon request to determine whether food is contaminated, to ensure they are in compliance with food safety laws and to maintain government tracking records. Refusal to register, permit inspector access or testing of food or equipment would be prohibited. “What is going to happen is that local agriculture will end up suffering through some onerous protocols designed for international agriculture that they simply don’t need,” Olson said. “Thus, it will be a way for industrial agriculture to manage local agriculture.”

Under the act, every food producer must have a written food safety plan describing likely hazards and preventative controls they have implemented and must abide by “minimum standards related to fertilizer use, nutrients, hygiene, packaging, temperature controls, animal encroachment, and water.”

“That opens a whole can of worms,” Olson said. “I think that’s where people are starting to freak out about losing organic agriculture. Who is going to decide what the minimum standards are for fertilization or anything else? The government is going to bring in big industry and say we are setting up these protocols, so what do you think we should do? Who is it going to bring in to ask? The government will bring in people who have economies of scale who have that kind of influence.” DeLauro’s act calls for the Food Safety Administration to create a “national traceability system” to retrieve history, use and location of each food product through all stages of production, processing and distribution.

Olson believes the regulations could create unjustifiable financial hardships for small farmers and run them out of business.  “That is often the purpose of rules and regulations: to get rid of your competition,” he said. “Only people who are very, very large can afford to comply. They can hire one person to do paperwork. There’s a specialization of labor there, and when you are very small, you can’t afford to do all of these things.”  Olson said despite good intentions behind the legislation, this act could devastate small U.S. farms.  “Every time we pass a rule or a law or a regulation to make the world a better place, it seems like what we do is subsidize production offshore,” he said. “We tell farmers they can no longer drive diesel tractors because they make bad smoke. Well, essentially what we’re doing is giving China a subsidy to grow our crops for us, or Mexico or anyone else.”

Section 304 of the Food Safety Modernization Act establishes a group of “experts and stakeholders from Federal, State, and local food safety and health agencies, the food industry, consumer organizations, and academia” to make recommendations for improving food-borne illness surveillance.

According to the act, “Any person that commits an act that violates the food safety law … may be assessed a civil penalty by the Administrator of not more than $1,000,000 for each such act.”  Each violation and each separate day the producer is in defiance of the law would be considered a separate offense and an additional penalty. The act suggests federal administrators consider the gravity of the violation, the degree of responsibility and the size and type of business when determining penalties.  Criminal sanctions may be imposed if contaminated food causes serious illness or death, and offenders may face fines and imprisonment of up to 10 years.

“It’s just frightening what can happen with good intentions,” Olson said. “It’s probably the most radical notions on the face of this Earth, but local agriculture doesn’t need government because it takes care of itself.”  Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act   Another “food safety” bill that has organic and small farmers worried is Senate Bill 425, or the Food Safety and Tracking Improvement Act, sponsored by Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio.

Brown’s bill is backed by lobbyists for Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland and Tyson. It was introduced in September and has been referred to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee. Some say the legislation could also put small farmers out of business.

Like HR 875, the measure establishes a nationwide “traceability system” monitored by the Food and Drug Administration for all stages of manufacturing, processing, packaging and distribution of food. It would cost $40 million over three years. “We must ensure that the federal government has the ability and authority to protect the public, given the global nature of the food supply,” Brown said when he introduced the bill. He suggested the FDA and USDA have power to declare mandatory recalls.

The government would track food shipped in interstate commerce through a recordkeeping and audit system, a secure, online database or registered identification. Each farmer or producer would be required to maintain records regarding the purchase, sale and identification of their products. A 13-member advisory committee of food safety and tracking technology experts, representatives of the food industry, consumer advocates and government officials would assist in implementing the traceability system.

The bill calls for the committee to establish a national database or registry operated by the Food and Drug Administration. It also proposes an electronic records database to identify sales of food and its ingredients “establishing that the food and its ingredients were grown, prepared, handled, manufactured, processed, distributed, shipped, warehoused, imported, and conveyed under conditions that ensure the safety of the food.”

It states, “The records should include an electronic statement with the date of, and the names and addresses of all parties to, each prior sale, purchase, or trade, and any other information as appropriate.”  If government inspectors find that a food item is not in compliance, they may force producers to cease distribution, recall the item or confiscate it.  “If the postal service can track a package from my office in Washington to my office in Cincinnati, we should be able to do the same for food products,” Sen. Brown said in a Sept. 4, 2008, statement. “Families that are struggling with the high cost of groceries should not also have to worry about the safety of their food. This legislation gives the government the resources it needs to protect the public.”

Recalls of contaminated food are usually voluntary; however, in his weekly radio address on March 15, President Obama announced he’s forming a Food Safety Working Group to propose new laws and stop corruption of the nation’s food.  The group will review, update and enforce food safety laws, which Obama said “have not been updated since they were written in the time of Teddy Roosevelt.”  The president said outbreaks from contaminated foods, such as a recent salmonella outbreak among consumers of peanut products, have occurred more frequently in recent years due to outdated regulations, fewer inspectors, scaled back inspections and a lack of information sharing between government agencies.

“In the end, food safety is something I take seriously, not just as your president but as a parent,” Obama said. “No parent should have to worry that their child is going to get sick from their lunch just as no family should have to worry that the medicines they buy will cause them harm.”

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92002

http://www.theroadtothehorizon.org/2008_04_01_archive.html

—————————————————————————————————————

Possible Related Posts:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h875/show

Homosexuals to be marked for execution? I’m not ‘gay’, so why do I care?

It’s called COMPASSION for my fellow man. Marriage is between a  Man and a WOMAN, that is the NATURAL order of things to PROCREATE the SPECIES. Very simple.

I’ve been called  by some a ‘Homo-phobe” and a “Gay-Hater” for thinking this way, so I just have to stop and ask myself, then WHY do I care that Millions of Homosexuals could be placing themselves in danger because of their un-natural sexual preference?

“Homosexuals are being USED by the RADICAL LEFT”!

Maybe it is I that has been brainwashed by Christianity to love my fellow man and NOT to judge them?  “Live and let Live”? Or maybe it was Martin Luther King, Jr’s  christian influence who taught us to “Judge not by the color of their skin, but  to judge people based on their character”?

Below is another story in the news that is happening ALL over the world. Do homosexuals in America REALLY want to “register” their unions and make it easy for the government to find them? Something to think about while you continue to condemn Christians that are NOT your enemies.

————————————————————————

In Uganda:

This bill is promoting hatred,” he said. “We’re turning Uganda into a police state. It will drive people to suicide.”

Buturo played down the influence of foreign evangelicals, saying the proposed legislation was an expression of popular outrage against “repugnant” practices. But activists like Cato argue anti-gay attitudes are a foreign import.

“In the beginning, when the missionaries brought religion, they said they were bringing love,” he said. Instead they brought hate, through homophobia.”

Lisa Says, “I have a problem with the statement above!  As was stated by their OWN government, it is a “POPULAR Outrage AGAINST “Repugnant” practices. This is NOT the first Time such a thing has occured in the world. Read your HISTORY! And do not THINK this can not happen within the tollerent masses of the USA ” Christians are NOT the enemy, it is those that allow  RADICAL special interest groups to  revolutionize homosexuals into thinking they have a RIGHT to marry, etc, that are ‘marking’ them for their own SELF destruction by exposing them to the public and the governments where they live.

Susan Timberlake, a senior adviser on human rights and law from UNAIDS, said such laws could hinder the fight against HIV/AIDS by driving people further underground. And activists also worry that the legislation could be used to blackmail or silence government critics.

Cato said he thinks the Ugandan bill will pass, perhaps in an altered form.

“It’s such a setback. But I hope we can overcome it,” he said. “I cannot believe this is happening in the 21st century.”

This source below is from

Porter – Homosexuals, Genocide of in the Holocaust
October 10, 1998

“The Nazis’ murder of some homosexuals started earlier than that of the Jews with the murders of Ernest Roehm and other brown shirts in his paramilitary group known as the SA, although the major reason for these murders was to eliminate a potentially rival force to the SS. Roehm was a major Nazi leader, second only to Hitler as they rose to power in the 20’s and early 30’s. He and his cadre of “brownshirts” were homosexuals, which was not a problem at the beginning for Hitler, but later did prove an embarrassment and a threat. Roehm and other SA leaders were murdered without warning in a famous blood purge which was led by Himmler and other SS officers at the instigation of Hitler and began on June 30, 1934, which has been called “The Night of Long Knives.”

In writing about the Holocaust, the “gay genocide” has often been either a taboo subject too delicate to touch upon, a topic obscured by other issues, or simply omitted. However there are wellresearched books  for example, John Lauritsen and David Thorstad, The Early Homosexual Rights Movement: 18641935 [New York: Times Change Press, 19741; Heinz Heger, The Men with the Pink Triangle [Boston: Alyson Publications, 19801. Richard Plant’s, The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals is one of the most outstanding, clearly and eloquently written.

Controversy surrounds every aspect of this genocide, even the label “genocide.” Since gays could “pass” (unlike Jews or Gypsies), most survived the war. If they remained celibate or “in the closet,” they could elude the Nazis and survive. Because they were difficult to detect, a considerable number were never rounded up. Thus, there are strong arguments not to call this a genocide.

On the other hand, there are strong arguments for this to be seen as a genocide: first, the stigmatization of homosexuals as “vermin,” “plague,” “cancerous ulcer,” and “a tumor’ is racist and the kind of dehumanization that enables genocide to occur. Under Himmler’s direction, the ferocity of attack gained impetus to seek out and destroy or sterilize every homosexual the Nazis could find. By the United Nations definition, these acts of sterilization fall under the category of limiting births, thus genocide. It is not an easy decision, but overall I personally adopt a nongenocide label, though it could fall under the rubric of what I would call genocidal acts. As for a planned, systematic genocide, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that there was none. Gays were victims of the Third Reich and therefore belong in any Holocaust museum, but I would conclude that gays were victims of a genocidal mentality, and not of outright genocide. [See DEFINITION OF GENOCIDE for more on controversies in defining genocide, including the differing opinion of the editor of the EncyclopediaEd.]

Overall, we can estimate the number of males convicted of homosexuality from 19331944 at between 50,000 to 63,000. The number of homosexuals incarcerated in the Nazi concentration camps is not known, much less the number who died there. Rudiger Lautmann in his Gesellschaft und Homosexualitat: Seminar [Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 19771, whose figures are used by Plant and other writers, estimates that somewhere between 5,000 to 15,000 homosexuals perished behind the barbedwire fences. These were victims who were labeled and processed as homosexuals. A figure of about 10,000 homosexuals is the one accepted by most scholars (although figures are thrown about wildly and estimates run as high as Jean Boisson’s one million dead.) Gay leaders and writers insist on higher figures in order to legitimate their claim of special pleading. Yet, why indeed are 10,000 killed less tragic than one million? In the aftermath of the Holocaust, numbers themselves seem to lose their significance. In any case, the major Holocaust institution in the USA, the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, recognizes the “gay genocide.”

Click her for more—- http://www.chgs.umn.edu/educational/homosexuals.html

———————————————————

Death penalty for gays? Uganda debates proposal

By KATHARINE HOURELD and GODFREY OLUKYA, Associated Press Writers Katharine Houreld And Godfrey Olukya, Associated Press Writers Tue Dec 8, 3:36 pm ET

KAMPALA, Uganda – Proposed legislation would impose the death penalty for some gay Ugandans, and their family and friends could face up to seven years in jail if they fail to report them to authorities. Even landlords could be imprisoned for renting to homosexuals.

Gay rights activists say the bill, which has prompted growing international opposition, promotes hatred and could set back efforts to combat HIV/AIDS. They believe the bill is part of a continentwide backlash because Africa’s gay community is becoming more vocal.

“It’s a question of visibility,” said David Cato, who became an activist after he was beaten up four times, arrested twice, fired from his teaching job and outed in the press because he is gay. “When we come out and ask for our rights, they pass laws against us.”

The legislation has drawn global attention from activists across the spectrum of views on gay issues. The measure was proposed in Uganda following a visit by leaders of U.S. conservative Christian ministries that promote therapy for gays to become heterosexual. However, at least one of those leaders has denounced the bill, as have some other conservative and liberal Christians in the United States.

Gay rights activists say the legislation is likely to pass. But the bill is still being debated and could undergo changes before a vote, which has not yet been set.

The Ugandan legislation in its current form would mandate a death sentence for active homosexuals living with HIV or in cases of same-sex rape. “Serial offenders” also could face capital punishment, but the legislation does not define the term. Anyone convicted of a homosexual act faces life imprisonment.

Anyone who “aids, abets, counsels or procures another to engage of acts of homosexuality” faces seven years in prison if convicted. Landlords who rent rooms or homes to homosexuals also could get seven years and anyone with “religious, political, economic or social authority” who fails to report anyone violating the act faces three years.

Gay rights activists abroad are focusing on the legislation. A protest against the bill is planned for Thursday in London; protests were held last month in New York and Washington.

David Bahati, the legislator sponsoring the bill, said he was encouraging “constructive criticism” to improve the law, but insisted strict measures were necessary to stop homosexuals from “recruiting” schoolchildren.

“The youths in secondary schools copy everything from the Western world and America,” said high school teacher David Kisambira. “A good number of students have been converted into gays. We hear there are groups of people given money by some gay organizations in developed countries to recruit youth into gay activities.”

Uganda’s ethics minister, James Nsaba Buturo, said the death sentence clause would probably be reviewed but maintained the law was necessary to counter foreign influence. He said homosexuality “is not natural in Uganda,” a view echoed by some Ugandans.

“I feel that the bill is good and necessary, but I don’t think gays should be killed. They should be imprisoned for about a year and warned never to do it again. The family is in danger in Uganda because the rate at which vice is spreading is appalling,” said shopkeeper John Muwanguzi.

Uganda is not the only country considering anti-gay laws. Nigeria, where homosexuality is already punishable by imprisonment or death, is considering strengthening penalties for activities deemed to promote it. Burundi just banned same-sex relationships and Rwanda is considering it.

Homophobia is rife even in more tolerant African countries.

In Kenya, homosexuality is illegal but the government has acknowledged its existence by launching sexual orientation survey to improve health care. Nevertheless, the recent marriage of two Kenyan men in London caused outrage. The men’s families in Kenya were harassed by reporters and villagers.

In South Africa, the only African nation to recognize gay marriage, gangs carry out so-called “corrective” rapes on lesbians. A 19-year-old lesbian athlete was gang-raped, tortured and murdered in 2008.

Debate over the Ugandan bill follows a conference in Kampala earlier this year attended by American activists who consider same-gender relationships sinful, and believe gays and lesbians can become heterosexual through prayer and counseling. Author Don Schmierer and “sexual reorientation coach” Caleb Lee Brundidge took part; they did not respond to interview requests.

A third American who took part in the conference in Uganda, Scott Lively, said the bill has gone too far.

“I agree with the general goal but this law is far too harsh,” said Lively, a California-based preacher and author of “The Pink Swastika” and other books that advise parents how to “recruit-proof” their children from gays.

“Society should actively discourage all sex outside of marriage and that includes homosexuality … The family is under threat,” he said. Gay people “should not be parading around the streets,” he added.

Frank Mugisha, a gay Ugandan human rights activist, said the bill was so poorly worded that someone could be imprisoned for giving a hug.

“This bill is promoting hatred,” he said. “We’re turning Uganda into a police state. It will drive people to suicide.”

Buturo played down the influence of foreign evangelicals, saying the proposed legislation was an expression of popular outrage against “repugnant” practices. But activists like Cato argue anti-gay attitudes are a foreign import.

“In the beginning, when the missionaries brought religion, they said they were bringing love,” he said. “Instead they brought hate, through homophobia.”

Susan Timberlake, a senior adviser on human rights and law from UNAIDS, said such laws could hinder the fight against HIV/AIDS by driving people further underground. And activists also worry that the legislation could be used to blackmail or silence government critics.

Cato said he thinks the Ugandan bill will pass, perhaps in an altered form.

“It’s such a setback. But I hope we can overcome it,” he said. “I cannot believe this is happening in the 21st century.”

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091208/ap_on_re_af/af_uganda_gay_death_penalty

—————————————————————————————————————–

Click here to find out more!

Venezuela: Gays Attacked, Harassed By Police

“Like most of those arrested, our identity documents and mobile phones were taken away, we were beaten, our sexual orientation was insulted in degrading language, and we were refused permission to speak to the Justice Ministry officials and members of the National Guard who were present,” Matheus told IPS.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/04/venezuela-gays-attacked-h_n_345600.html

———————————————————————————————————

A FULL Web Page regarding Homosexual controversy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/gay-rights

——————————————————————————–

http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/marked-massacred-rise-gay-culture-symbolism

Obama’s Season of Hope 2010: More Federal Taxes, Less State Representation

“Job Creation” is  something that Obama has NO understanding nor knowledge of doing as he has NEVER run a company nor even held an executive position UNTIL being “elected” CIC of our great country. From his own lips, he has admitted that the job he holds was beyond his expertise, yet was somehow voted into office, at one of the worst economic times in our history.

The CIC is talking about a government expansion policy that runs parallel in many ways to the FAILED  policies of FDR. It is apparent to me, that little to zero of this expansion has to do with the American way of life, small business creation, which employs 70% of Americans.

Unlike the FDR policies of the 1930’s and Americans that had pride in their own abilities to work and take care of themselves who were looking for a HAND-UP, not a HAND-OUT, the “Season of Hope” 2010, will be a legacy IMO,  that our nation may not recover from mainly due to motives  and the agenda that is being push through EVERY aspect of our nation. FDR Policy kills job market.
Currently the “Season Of Hope” includes a few of  the following attacks to our freedoms, liberties and death of private sector job creation.
  • A Trillion dollar, 2000+ page bill of a Health Scare program that our nation CAN NOT afford and destroys our constitutional rights.
  • Cap and Trade, policy based on falsified scientific data, which will also cost the American people another cool TRILLION Dollars of additional taxes we can not afford.
  • Higher Taxes on EVERYTHING including DEATH-Didn’t the new CIC promise repeatedly that our taxes would NOT go up ONE DIME?
  • Additional withholding taxes, Like we can afford to pay more
  • Unionization: The jobs that remain are being forced into unions, thus if you are not a part of the union and pay their ‘protection dues kickbacks’,  then you will not be hired
  • Green Jobs: More government expansion because most monies will be coming from the TAX PAYER funds
  • Invest in Infrastructure: More Government jobs and MORE taxes from the TAX Payer coffers
  • Tax Payer Funds to go to State and Local Governments: = Spread the Wealth of one state to that of another, therefore rewarding the states that are bankrupt and fiscally incompetent and irresponsible, while punishing the states that have done their job for their state.
NOTE: The last one listed is of GREAT interest to me coming from the Confederate state of Texas. It was this very same type of thing that caused the Southern states to Secede from the Union before the Civil War of 1860. Morrill Tariff. Folks better understand what the meaning of Taxing a group of states heavily without representation or benefit, and giving the ‘wealth’ over to those that are not managing their business or states, while forcing the ones being robbed to suffer, most likely will NOT end well!!
————————————————————————————————————-

Tyranny or Freedom

Obama Job Creation? Sen. John Cornyn explains

Job Seekers in Detroit, 1930, Unemployment ravaged working and middle class Americans, and male breadwinners spent long hours and weeks trying to find work. Waiting in endless lines like this one was in Detroit not uncommon for job-seeking Americans. Even with the creation of job works programs in the mid-1930s, employment was hard to come by even for the most qualified of workers. Source: Detroit Free Press.

From the Huffington Post: “Even as he trumpeted a slowdown in the nation’s job losses Friday, President Barack Obama put finishing touches on a proposal he’ll unveil next week to “jump-start” business hiring across America.

In a speech from Washington on Tuesday, Obama plans to send Congress a list of ideas he supports for a new jobs bill. He will endorse sending the biggest chunk of fresh money to cash-strapped state and local governments to stem their layoffs and on expanding a program that gives people cash incentives to fix up their homes with energy-saving materials,a senior administration official said.

Referencing a dip in unemployment last month, Obama said, “And this is good news. Just in time for the season of hope.”

:But I do want to keep this in perspective,” he added. “We still have a long way to go. I consider one job lost one job too many.”

Obama will also endorse new tax breaks for small businesses that hire workers, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the package, and Obama’s speech, are still being crafted. The president will support some new spending on construction of roads, bridges and other construction, but prefers to see that as a smaller portion of the package because administration economists calculate it doesn’t give as quick a boost to job creation as the other measures, the official said.

“We need to grow jobs and get America back to work as quickly as we can,” Obama said Friday at an event at Lehigh Carbon Community College. “On Tuesday, I’m going to speak in greater detail about the ideas I’ll be sending to Congress to help jump-start private sector hiring and get Americans back to work.”

Job losses in the U.S. have been the worst since the 1930s, but new statistics out Friday showed a relatively moderate shedding of 11,000 jobs last month. The unemployment rate dipped from 10.2 percent in October to 10 percent in November…”—click link below for more

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/04/obama-in-allentown-pa-to_n_380123.html

—————————————————————————————————–

OBAMA HAS DECLARED WAR ON SMALL BUSINESS: The Real Story of Why Obama Hates Self-Made Entrepreneurs From Obama’s College Classmate and The Only Small Businessman to Run for President in Modern History By Wayne Allyn Root

“I believe Barack Obama has declared WAR on small business and entrepreneurship with his plans to dramatically increase taxes and (perhaps worse) eliminate deductions for successful Americans. More importantly, I know Barack Obama’s type. No one in American politics, today, better understands his motivations to damage and destroy small business owners and entrepreneurs. You see, Obama was my classmate at Columbia University (Class of ’83). Today virtually all my Columbia classmates are in three fields- law, politics or the media.

Let me relate a telling and shocking story about this group, that goes a long way toward explaining Obama’s motivations. By the way, this group proves that just because you are book-smart, doesn’t mean you are smart. Back in 1981, I was sitting in my Political Science class at Columbia University when my classmates heard the first reports that President Ronald Reagan (my hero) had been shot. I immediately witnessed the most revolting, disgusting, disgraceful response to that news imaginable- my classmates cheered, high-fived, hugged and screamed in joy. They pumped clenched fist into the air. They screamed in celebration, “YES, Reagan is dead!” These are the people now running our country. These are the people now running the media- deciding the news you get to see, hear and read. The same type people are running the Obama administration. Perhaps more than the same type, my educated guess is these are the ACTUAL people from my Columbia political science class that day.

I’m certain many of Obama’s Columbia University and Harvard Law School classmates became lifelong friends with him- after all, their joy at my beloved hero Ronald Reagan’s possible death that day, confirms a shared common love of socialism and hatred towards capitalism, capitalists, entrepreneurs, and any politician that dares to champion free enterprise/democracy.I’d actually call it a sickness or mental illness. None of these people are self-made and they are angry, bitter and resentful of those who are.

Consequently, they are on a lifelong vendetta to damage or destroy self-made Americans; to literally tax us to death; to take away our economic freedom; to purge self-made entrepreneurs out of society. These Obama types have always worked for others (government, community activist groups, big corporate bureaucracies). They can’t stand the thought that we work for ourselves and as a result of our courageous risks, actually make more money than they do. They can’t stand our economic freedom. They hate that we make our own decisions, without government control or authority ruling our lives. These Obama types hate, despise, want to destroy anyone that has the audacity to want to make money…or worse (in their minds), the audacity to think they should keep more of their own money. This group thinks our hard-earned money is their money. They want our money so they can use it to fund their liberal and socialist pet projects; to pursue social engineering (redistributing wealth to create “equality” and overcome what they perceive as racism); and to quite simply bribe their loyal supporters and voters (anyone who works for government, or expects government handouts).

Obama’s book should have been called “The Audacity of Class Warfare.” Obama and his friends have a chip on their shoulders. They’ve never funded, started or run a business. They’ve never created jobs. They are not self-made. They have no understanding of entrepreneurship. We are not in their group. We are not in their clique. We are not their friends. We are certainly not their supporters. Why should Obama care if he legislates, regulates or taxes us out of existence- we didn’t vote for him, we didn’t support him, and we certainly didn’t contribute to him or his liberal causes. In Obama’s liberal caste order, we are the “untouchables.”

We are therefore expendable. So he creates economic policy to destroy us. It’s a Triple Crown for Obama.

  • First he gets to punish us for the crime of being self-made, while he’s not. That makes him and all his liberal friends feel good. They’ve won. We’ve lost.
  • Second, he gets to use our tax money to bribe his voters (who don’t own businesses, and who expect government to provide either jobs or handouts from cradle to grave).
  • Third is the biggest bonus of all- by taxing us to death, he deprives the small business owners and entrepreneurs of the money we need to fund his political opponents. Brilliant. It’s pretty simple.

There is now a WAR between Obama’s vision of big government (government programs, government employees, and those who expect government entitlements) and anyone in the private sector. It’s a war we must fight with every last dollar and every last ounce of energy we have. It is a fight for our very economic survival. It is a war we must win at any and all costs to save capitalism, free markets, America, and the American Way of life. It took me 30 years of hard work, commitment, tenacity, relentlessness and creativity to achieve “overnight success.” Obama is trying to ruin everything I’ve accomplished and built in 4 short years. I won’t let him. I will fight him day and night. I will fight him every step of the way.

As Winston Churchill once said, “If you’re going through hell, keep going.” All small businessmen and women and entrepreneurs are in hell right now. It is Obama’s hell. I will not rest until I take back my country from this assault on the heroes of American business.”

Video Wayne’s Video and web site here  http://www.rootforamerica.com/

—————————————————————————————————-

Obama ADMITS his Inexperience for the CIC job!!

——————————————————————————————–

Related Posts:

http://www.gnosticliberationfront.com/you_are_all_slaves.htm

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/picturing_the_century/galleries/greatdep.html#

http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~hius202/lectures/lecture14.html

———————————————————————————————