Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad: an astonishingly bold stand


The Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback says he stands up for what he believes. Even so, the Tim Tebow Super Bowl ad against abortion threatens to politicize ‘Super Sunday’ and turn some fans and NFL coaches against him.

In this Jan. 1 photo, Florida quarterback Tim Tebow stands on the sidelines during the Sugar Bowl football game at the Louisiana Superdome in New Orleans.

By Patrik Jonsson


In a historic career at the University of Florida, Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback Tim Tebow has kept his faith and his convictions confined mostly to a few square inches beneath his eyes: Every Saturday, he would write a Biblical citation on his eye black.

Now, at the very moment when his hope of becoming a pro football quarterback hangs in the balance, Tim Tebow is taking on perhaps the single most divisive topic in America – abortion – in an advertisement set to air during the single most-watched television program of the year: the Super Bowl.

For a handsome and humble young man, who has become revered throughout much of the South for his devoutness as well as his on-field skill, it is an astonishingly bold decision. In the 30-second ad against abortion, he will speak from his own experience of how his mother did not abort him despite medical advice to do so.

Abortion-rights groups are already calling for the ad’s removal, saying that the group behind the ad is “anti-woman” and “anti-equality.” Online chatter is expressing an unease about Tebow’s willingness to infuse Super Bowl Sunday – an apolitical American rite – with politics. And, perhaps most concerning for Tebow himself, pro football teams already skeptical of his ability to transition to the National Football League might see this as further reason to avoid him on draft day.

“I do stand up for what I believe,” Tebow told Sports Illustrated last summer. “And at least you can respect that.”

Tebow’s story

Raised on a farm outside Jacksonville, Fla., by the son of an evangelist preacher and a mom who home-schooled him, Tebow is an amalgam of charismatic leader, world-class athlete, and devout Christian Southern boy. His faith resonates among fans in the Deep South.

But by targeting the Super Bowl, his “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life” ad ranges far beyond the familiar confines of the conservative South. Fans and coaches in the NFL might resent him for pushing a cultural message on a day usually reserved for quarterback matchups and halftime extravaganzas.

“We’re going down a road here that is filled with potholes, moral and otherwise,” writes Orlando Sentinel sports columnist George Diaz, suggesting that the ad could lead to more advocacy ads, which Super Bowl broadcaster CBS has said it will consider.

The ad, funded by the Focus on the Family organization, is expected to tell the story of Tebow and his mother, Pam. Ill while pregnant with Tim, Pam refused suggestions to abort her son. Those who have seen the ad describe it as “uplifting.”

“I asked God for a preacher, and he gave me a quarterback,” Tebow’s dad, Bob, has famously said about the trying pregnancy.

The appropriate venue?

But various groups, including the National Organization for Women, have called for CBS to withdraw the ad. They say that both the ad’s advocacy content, as well as the group behind it are unacceptable. So far, CBS has said it intends to run the ad.

“This un-American hate doesn’t have a place in this all-American pastime,” Kierra Johnson, executive director of Choice USA, told Fox News.

Tebow has for years had to walk the line between the conviction of his faith and open proselytizing. But the ad comes at a crossroads for Tebow. Professional scouts have said Tebow’s throwing motion and skill-set are poorly suited for the NFL, and his preparations for the upcoming Senior Bowl, which offers coaches a first up-close look at college prospects, haven’t gone well so far this week.

“The anti-abortion ad that he’s in that will possibly run during the Super Bowl will likely create an uproar for him as well that some teams might not want to get involved in,” writes Mark Miller on Yahoo! Sports.

Yet it is the timing of his ad – and not necessarily the content – that could knock Tebow down a few notches among NFL fans. Indeed, a May 2009 Gallup poll found that, for the first time since the poll began in 1995, more Americans are anti-abortion than pro-abortion rights. But timing is everything.

“There are going to be about 100 million of us who won’t be happy for 30 seconds of the Super Bowl,” writes CBS Sports’ Gregg Doyel. “I’m not complaining about the ad because it’s anti-abortion and I’m not. I’m complaining about the ad because it’s pro-politics. And I’m not. Not on Super Sunday.”

Digg This
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Obama pushes gay rights, but not without criticism from activists


Many gay rights activists think Obama isn’t doing enough. But he’s in no rush on same-sex marriage or the military’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy.

Ed Grandis, left, and Juan D. Rondon, hug after a bill allowing same-sex marriage in the District of Columbia was introduced at a city council meeting in Washington, on Tuesday, Oct. 6.

In last year’s presidential election, Barack Obama won 70 percent of the gay vote, John McCain just 27 percent.

Does that kind of clearly dominant constituency — one that’s more politically-attuned than the rest of the electorate — come with any political obligation regarding gay rights? You bet it does, and this weekend Obama is acknowledging the debt.

On the eve of Sunday’s National Equality March, expected to draw thousands to Washington, he’s addressing the Human Rights Campaign, a national gay rights group.

So far, his is a mixed record.

While Obama remains opposed to marriage among same-sex couples, in June he extended some benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees. And he has taken steps to include among his administration openly gay officials.

John Berry, the director of the Office of Personnel Management, is the government’s highest-ranking gay official. David Huebner, chief lawyer for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, has been nominated ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa. Mr. Huebner would be just the second openly gay US ambassador. (The first was appointed by Bill Clinton.)

Marriage and the US military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gay men and women in uniform remain the toughest issues for the nation — and especially for Obama.

The Pew Research Center reported Friday that while most Americans favor civil unions for same-sex couples, they remain opposed to gay marriage.

It’s an issue that transcends government policy to an unusual extent, carrying significant moral and religious overtones. Pew finds that “nearly half of the public (49 percent) says homosexual behavior is morally wrong, while 9 percent say it is morally acceptable and 35 percent say it is not a moral issue.”

Meanwhile, the armed services for years have wrestled with the Pentagon’s policy regarding gay service members — a policy which senior retired officers (and even some on active duty) increasingly have spoken out against at a time when the troops, like the relatively young cohort of Americans they’re part of, don’t see the point in discriminating against gay men and lesbians.

Many gay rights advocates are losing patience with Obama who (unlike Bill Clinton) has no inclination to jump right into the military issue.

“Eleven months after his election, he has failed to deliver on any of his commitments to gay Americans, but even worse has been his refusal to engage around these issues,” Richard Socarides, who advised President Bill Clinton’s administration on gay and lesbian policy, told the Associated Press.

“What he needs to do now is engage and deliver,” said Socarides. “Spend some of his political capital on ending the gay military ban, a hugely symbolic issue. And with no intellectually sound arguments left against it, come out squarely for gay marriage equality.”

Obama also is being nudged to retire today’s military policy by many members of Congress. Led by Rep. Patrick Murphy (D) of Pennsylvania (the first Iraq war veteran elected to Congress) 176 House members have signed on to a bill doing away with don’t ask, don’t tell.

Meanwhile, the US Senate — and just last week, the US House of Representatives — have passed versions of a bill broadening the federal hate-crime law to cover violence against gays.

Obama is eager to sign the new hate crimes law. And White House officials push back against the notion that the president is dragging his feet on gay rights.

“The president has been very clear. He’s not hiding, he’s not avoiding [the gay and lesbian] issue,” Melody Barnes, the president’s top domestic policy adviser, told the Washington Post. “He has walked into a range of different communities as well as looked into the eyes of those in the GLBT community and been very clear about what he supports and what he wants done and the way he thinks it’s practical to get it done.”

Digg This
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize?


America reacts to Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize


By Drew Zahn


2009 Nobel Peace Prize Winner

“It’s not April 1, is it?” a White House aide reportedly asked ABC’s Washington correspondent George Stephanopoulos.

Apparently, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue awoke, as many American households did this morning, to some shocking news: President Barack Obama has been awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

In an official statement, the president says he was “most surprised and deeply humbled.”

Others have expressed similar shock that Obama, in office for less than 10 months, had been awarded the prize. Underlying the shock is the fact that the deadline for filing nominations for the award is Feb. 1 of any given year, meaning the president was nominated after being in office for just 11 days.

“The real question Americans are asking is, ‘What has President Obama actually accomplished?'” said Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele in a statement. “It is unfortunate that the president’s star power has outshined tireless advocates who have made real achievements working towards peace and human rights.”

A shocked Michael Savage further blasted the Nobel Prize committee for its choice:

“What has [Obama] done? Has he discovered a cure for brain cancer I don’t know about?” the talk radio host asked in a Newsweek interview. “We all know what the Nobel Prize committee is ever since Yasir Arafat won. It’s a radical leftist front group that hijacked Alfred Nobel’s prize.”

Fellow radio talker Rush Limbaugh also heaped on criticism, stating that awarding the prize to such an unaccomplished president is a “greater embarrassment” than Obama’s recent failed bid to bring the Olympic Games to Chicago.

“This fully exposes the illusion that is Barack Obama,” Limbaugh told POLITICO in an e-mail. “And with this ‘award’ the elites of the world are urging Obama, THE MAN OF PEACE, to not do the surge in Afghanistan, not take action against Iran and its nuclear program and to basically continue his intentions to emasculate the United States.”

Limbaugh continued, “They love a weakened, neutered U.S., and this is their way of promoting that concept.”

Other reactions, however, have been glowing:

“Obama got the prize not for doing, but for being. Not for making peace, but for exemplifying something new on the world stage – the politics of dignity,” wrote Robert Fuller, former president of Oberlin College, on the Huffington Post. “What is dignitarian politics? It is the recognition that people the world over actually want dignity more than they want either liberty or equality. In policy terms, it means ensuring dignity for all – within and among nations.”

Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in a statement, “We are pleased that our president has been awarded one of the highest honors for any world leader. Under president Obama’s leadership, our nation is beginning to restore its international image as a beacon of peace and justice.”

He continued, “CAIR and the American Muslim community stand ready to partner with President Obama in promoting the ‘mutual interest and mutual respect’ he mentioned in his inaugural address.”

WND readers have sent in their share of comments, too.

“To the best of my knowledge, no American President in modern history with no significant foreign policy experience, no major world-shaking legislation to his credit as a junior senator with two years of experience and only a few weeks in office as president before the deadline for nominations ended has won a Nobel Peace Prize,” writes WND reader Geoffrey Cox. “Surely this could only be accomplished either by a figure of deity, or by the voting of some incredibly stupid or corrupt Norwegians – I’m going with the latter.”

Obama is the third sitting U.S. president to win the award, after Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, the former in the fifth year of his presidency for negotiating an end to the Russo-Japanese war and the latter in the sixth year of his administration, largely for his role in establishing the League of Nations.

Other WND readers have also taken exception to awarding the Nobel Prize to a president with few international accomplishments:

  • “The Nobel Peace Prize nine months into his term for … what?” asks WND reader Henry Frickel. “That’s like giving me, a guy who barely knows how to cut-and-paste and thinks Excel is something you do with that pedal on the right, the Computer World ‘Techie of the Year Award.'”
  • “Obama winning the Nobel, what a joke!” scoffed reader Sherry Perkins. “How do you win a Nobel Prize for peace when you have troops killing people in another country?”
  • “Has President Obama reduced standing armies? Did he speak out for the peace process when thousands of Iranians were slaughtered in the streets? No,” writes reader Louis Frederick. “He managed to convince most the world that America is arrogant, uncaring and not worthy of the superpower status we once held. He stood with hands on hips while Russia rolled over the democratic state of Georgia, and the reward was the removal of a missile shield from Czechoslovakia. He flaps lips while Iran is feverishly working on nuclear weapons to bring ‘peace’ to the Middle East by destroying the democratic state of Israel. Ludicrous.”
  • R.C. Rochte comments, “So, ‘The One’ has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (on credit for more surrenders of American sovereignty in the future, no doubt).”

Other reactions from around the country have challenged Obama’s merit for the award, not on his resume but on his politics. Judie Brown, president of American Life League, released the following statement:

“Bestowing the Nobel Prize on the most rabid pro-abortion president in history is a direct slap in the face to past recipient, Mother Teresa of Calcutta who said, upon receiving her Nobel Peace Prize: ‘the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing – direct murder by the mother herself.'” Brown said. “In awarding the prize to Obama, the Nobel Committee is announcing that abortion is the cornerstone of a hellish ‘peace’ – the damning silence of 51 million aborted children in the United States alone.”

She concluded, “The Nobel Committee has bestowed the ‘Peace Prize’ on a man dedicated to war in the womb.”

Geir Lundestad, director of the Norwegian Nobel Institute, however, defended the choice – even stating the vote was unanimous – on ABC’s “Good Morning America”:

“President Obama has changed very dramatically international politics,” Lundestad said. “We feel he has emphasized multilateral diplomacy, he has addressed international institutions, dialogue negotiations. He has inspired the world with his vision of a world without nuclear arms. He has changed the U.S. policy dramatically. There’s a whole list.”

As for the president himself, Obama said from the White House Rose Garden, “I do not feel I deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures who have been honored by this prize.”

“I also know this prize reflects the kind of world that those men and women … want to build,” Obama said of the prize committee. “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments but rather an affirmation of American leadership.”

He concluded, “I will accept this award as a call to action.”

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Brzezinski suggests Obama shoot down Israeli jets


‘They have the choice of turning back or not’

Zbigniew Brzezinski

The national security adviser during the administration of President Jimmy Carter says the United States should shoot down Israeli jets if that nation chooses to take military action against a nuclear project in Iran.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, in an interview with the Daily Beast website,declared, “We are not exactly impotent little babies.”

Israel long has been thought to be considering a military strike against operations in Iran that could result in a nuclear weapon for the regime of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Israel has stated that it is unwilling to have its future threatened by a leader who believes it should be wiped off the map, as Ahmadinejad has stated, with access to nuclear weapons.

But such an Israeli attack on Iran probably would have to fly over coalition airspace in Iraq.

“Are we just going to sit there and watch?” Brzezinski demanded.

Get your dictionary to the Middle East: “Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict”

He said the U.S. has to be “serious” about denying Israel the right to attack.

“That means a denial where you aren’t just saying it. If they fly over, you go up and confront them. They have the choice of turning back or not,” he said.

“No one wishes for this but it could be a Liberty in reverse,” he said.

The Liberty was a U.S. ship in international waters in the Middle East during the Six-Day War in 1967 that was hit by Israeli gunfire.

Brzezinski advised Carter on confrontations in Iran, Afghanistan and the Middle East during Carter’s White House tenure.

He said the Obama administration also already should have developed “a clearer position on what we are prepared to do to promote a Palestinian-Israeli peace.”

“Simply giving a frequent-traveler ticket to George Mitchell is not the same thing as policy. It took a long time to get going on Iran, but there is an excuse there, the Iranian domestic mess. And we are now eight months into the administration, and I would have thought by now we could have formulated a strategy that we would have considered ‘our’ strategy for dealing with Iran and Pakistan,” he said.

“For example, the Carter administration, which is sometimes mocked, by now had in motion a policy of disarmament with the Russians, which the Russians didn’t like, but eventually bought; it had started a policy of normalization with the Chinese; it rammed through the Panama Canal treaty; and it was moving very, very openly toward an Israeli-Arab political peace initiative,” he said.

WND columnist and New York Times best-selling author Mike Evans wrote about Brzezinski just before the 2008 election, explaining how Obama added Brzezinski to his list of “advisers.”

“One of Brzezinski’s first jobs as adviser was to defend Obama’s plan, if elected, to meet with Iran and Syria: ‘What’s the hand-up about negotiating with the Syrians or Iranians?’ asked Brzezinski. ‘What it in effect means is that you only talk to people who agree with you.’

“People who agree with you?” wrote Evans. “I, for one, would like to know just why Obama would want to talk with Iran’s president who denies the Holocaust, has called Israel a ‘stinking corpse’ and vowed to wipe it off the map.”

WND columnist Ben Shapiro noted about that time Brzezinski “believes that the Jewish lobby forces America into pro-Israel policy, and he defends Carter’s anti-Semitic book, “Peace, Not Apartheid.”

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Obama: Boys from Brazil better than U.S.


President blocks oil drilling at home, funds exploration abroad

Editor’s Note: The following report is excerpted from Jerome Corsi’s Red Alert, the premium online newsletter published by the current No. 1 best-selling author, WND staff writer and columnist. Subscriptions are $99 a year or $9.95 per month for credit card users. Annual subscribers will receive a free autographed copy of “The Late Great USA,” a book about the careful deceptions of a powerful elite who want to undermine our nation’s sovereignty.

A controversy developed when it was revealed the Obama administration is willing to spend billions of dollars to fund offshore drilling in Brazil while blocking U.S. development of oil and natural gas resources by continuing environmental objections to opening U.S. offshore drilling, Jerome Corsi’s Red Alert reports.

Underlying the controversy was the disclosure that Obama-supporter and billionaire hedge-fund manager George Soros bought a $811 million stake in Petroleo Brasileiro SA in the second quarter, making the Brazilian state-controlled oil company his investment fund’s largest holding.

The sparks began flying when former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin wrote on her Facebook page: “So why is it that during these tough times, when we have great needs at home, the Obama White House is prepared to send more than two billion of your hard-earned tax dollars to Brazil so that the nation’s state-owned oil company, Petrobras, can drill off shore and create jobs developing its own resources?”

Corsi noted that Palin was particularly frustrated because she had campaigned for the White House with Republican Sen. John McCain in 2008 partially on the theme “Drill Now,” and she has experienced decades of living in Alaska where environmentalists have blocked drilling in ANWR.

“I’ll speak for the talent I have personally witnessed on the oil fields in Alaska when I say no other country in the world has a stronger workforce than America, no other country in the world has better safety standards that America, and no other country in the world has stricter environmental standards than America,” Palin wrote. “Come to Alaska and witness how oil and gas can be developed simultaneously with the preservation of our eco-systems.”

Within hours of Palin’s posting, the White House hit back.

Ben Smith of Politico wrote that the U.S. Export Import Bank disputed Palin’s attack, noting that the $2 billion loan to Brazil’s state-owned energy conglomerate Petrobras would not come from tax dollars.

What set off Palin was a Wall Street Journal editorial that lead with the headline, “Obama underwrites offshore drilling,” followed by the subtitle, “Too bad it’s not in U.S. waters.”

What underscored the controversy was that Petrobras notified the country’s National Petroleum Agency late Monday that the company had made yet a third huge oil find in the Campos Basin off the coast of Rio de Janeiro in the Atlantic Ocean, as reported by the Wall Street Journal.

“Brazil, a country that was once considered so devoid of oil that its auto industry has traditionally been fueled by sugar-derived ethanol, is now positioned to become a world leader in oil exports,” Corsi wrote, “thanks exclusively to deep-water oil exploration that has paid off.”

Red Alert has consistently argued that U.S. energy policy makes no sense when blocking offshore oil and natural gas exploration dooms the U.S. to continued dependency on foreign oil – especially at a time when the nation’s negative balance of trade and trillion-dollar deficits have caused the U.S. to hemorrhage the outflow of dollars when the nation can ill-afford the loss of foreign exchange reserves.

Red Alert has also consistently argued that oil is an abiotic product that should be found in abundance as drilling technology becomes affordable at deeper levels, especially offshore.

A key theme of “Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil,” the book Corsi co-authored with Craig Smith, CEO of Swiss America, was that Russian geologists at the end of World War II advanced deep-earth theories of oil.

According to deep-earth theories, oil is abiotic, a natural product of the earth created in the earth’s mantle on an ongoing basis, not a biological product or “fossil fuel” created by biological debris, including dinosaurs, ancient forests or small biological agents such as plankton.

While abiotic theories are still not embraced by U.S. geologists, Ukrainian geologists are generally in agreement with Russia.

“What should be clear is that opening up the U.S. offshore continental shelf to drilling will increase the supply of U.S.-produced oil and natural gas over time,” Corsi wrote. “Rather than funding offshore drilling in Brazil, President Obama would be well advised to take on the environmentalists to fund offshore drilling in the United States.”

Corsi continued, “Obama’s policy choice is obvious when we realize that most environmentalists, like President Obama himself, derive from the radical left where ideological purity demands that offshore drilling, especially by the capitalist-motivated United States, must be viewed as evil.”

Red Alert’s author, whose books “The Obama Nation” and “Unfit for Command” have topped the New York Times best-sellers list, received his Ph.D. from Harvard University in political science in 1972. For nearly 25 years, beginning in 1981, he worked with banks throughout the U.S. and around the world to develop financial services marketing companies to assist banks in establishing broker/dealers and insurance subsidiaries to provide financial planning products and services to their retail customers. In this career, Corsi developed three different third-party financial services marketing firms that reached gross sales levels of $1 billion in annuities and equal volume in mutual funds. In 1999, he began developing Internet-based financial marketing firms, also adapted to work in conjunction with banks.

In his 25-year financial services career, Corsi has been a noted financial services speaker and writer, publishing three books and numerous articles in professional financial services journals and magazines.

For financial guidance during difficult times, read Jerome Corsi’s Red Alert, the premium, online intelligence news source by the WND staff writer, columnist and author of the New York Times No. 1 best-seller, “The Obama Nation.

For full immediate access to Jerome Corsi’s Red Alert, subscribe now.

Subscribe to Jerome Corsi’s new weekly economic newsletter, Red Alert, for one year and, for a limited time get “The Late Great USA” free. (This offer applies only to annual subscriptions for $99.)

Technorati : ,
Del.icio.us : ,
Zooomr : ,
Flickr : ,

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Opposing rally has ‘pridefest’ fans enraged


Christians promoting ‘God Has a Better Way’ event

By Bob Unruh

Homosexuals planning for tomorrow’s Pride Charlotte festival in Charlotte, N.C., are enraged because the Coalition of Conscience has set up a Christian event, called “God Has a Better Way” nearby at the same time.

Michael Brown, who is director of the Charlotte-based coalition, said hundreds of people from area churches are coordinating the rally that will be unique.

“Nothing like this has ever been done in conjunction with a gay pride event in any city before, and those who join together on this day will be part of history in the making,” he said.

Brown told WND that when his ministry moved into Charlotte several years ago, his goal was to reach out to individuals with compassion and resist homosexual activism with courage.

Since the strategy was adopted, the homosexual event has been moved out of a public park and onto private property, and the goal now is to say, Brown said, “This [pridefest] is not welcome, but at the same time we care about you as individuals, friends and neighbors.”

But homosexual activists apparently aren’t listening.

At the pro-homosexual TruthWinsOut.org, a commentary said, “Brown has since launched an online initiative titled ‘God Has A Better Way,’ in which Brown claims that his agenda is ‘Spirit-birthed’ – a statement of sheer, unapologetic blasphemy.”

The website’s attack continued, “Brown refers to his crowd’s ‘biblical convictions’ but his ‘convictions’ in no way resemble the message of the Gospels or, for that matter, much of Hebrew Scripture. Brown appeals for gay people not to be mean-spirited – but he fully intends to remain as mean-spirited and warlike.”

Another site, InterstateQ, said, “This time, Brown’s twisted logic won’t be enough to save him from his own words. The disturbed and maniacal history of his verbally violent, militant and extremist rhetoric serves as its own ironclad indictment. He can no longer hide or run from this history, and neither can he sweep it under the rug.”

Sarcasm ruled on Lavender Liberal, which wrote, “‘We understand, of course, that in your eyes, our biblical convictions constitute hate, and it is hurtful to us that you feel that way.’ Awwwwww! It’s ‘hurtful’! Mikey’s dainty little feelers are hurt!

The commentary continued, “If there is a god, or a thousand gods, or no god, you know nothing of the ‘love’ you have twisted, corrupted, and aborted from that Holy Book of yours. Your ‘message’ no more resembles that of your fabled Jesus than Pat Boone resembles Big Mama Thornton.”

Several of the condemnations of the Christian rally went further, too:

On the BoxTurtleBulletin site, “jimmy” said, “I will have my pepper spray, spring loaded baton and taser if these nutcases even get near me! I have used them before and will use them again on these nutjobs!”

Another comment on the “joemygod” site was, “Nail them all to crosses and let the corpses rot as a warning to other Jesus-pig people.”

Brown told WND that his event is supported by Lou Engle, the national director of “The Call to Action,” seeking to bring cultural change through prayer and fasting.

He also said other national ministries are looking at the model being used in Charlotte.

Brown said his “God Has a Better Way” rally will require participants to sign statements affirming, “I will not engage in hate speech, name-calling, or angry rhetoric; I will seek to befriend those who oppose me; I will seek to overcome bad attitudes with good attitudes; I will seek to be a living example of Jesus; I will not violate the law.”

“We have great love for the gay and lesbian community,” Brown said, “and have always treated them with dignity and respect; at the same time, we take strong exception to the gay activist agenda and will be sending a message to the city and the nation that God Has a Better Way.”

Rally participants will meet at Charlotte’s First Baptist Church at noon and will talk together to the Pride Charlotte rally. The group has a permit for an event on property across the street from the homosexual celebration.

Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Flickr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Senate vote for ‘hate crimes’ sparks warning


‘The people will not remain silent forever’

By Bob Unruh

A key Senate vote during the wee hours when most Americans were asleep has added the so-called “hate crimes” plan, which creates federal protections and privileges homosexuals and others who have chosen alternative sexual lifestyles, to a defense spending bill.

While there are procedural hurdles yet, opponents say they expect the proposal that essentially makes homosexuals a protected class of citizens in the United States soon will reach the desk of President Obama, who has lobbied for it.

But the vote prompted both a warning about what a law linking criminal behavior to thought would do to free speech and a promise that the nation won’t give up its citizens’ basic rights easily.

“In six months President Obama and the Democratic-led Congress have forced on the American people the most radical and and immoral agenda,” said Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel.“The administration and the Democratic-led Congress are out of touch with the mainstream. They represent the most fringe extreme elements of America. They will not be able to continue their efforts to undermine moral values, socialize the economy and trash American pride and heritage.

“The people will not remain silent forever,” he said.

The House approved its version, H.R. 1913, or the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, April 29. But the Senate plan remained in the Judiciary Committee until Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced its consideration this week.

Then in a middle-of-the-night vote, senators approved 63-28 a plan to add it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill pending, despite opposition from Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

“This is a complete abdication of the responsibilities of the Judiciary Committee,” McCain said.

As WND reported, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder admitted a homosexual activist who is attacked following a Christian minister’s sermon about homosexuality would be protected by the proposed federal law, but a minister attacked by a homosexual wouldn’t be.

The revelations came from Holder’s June testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which was taking comments on the proposal. The measure also was the subject of discussion on talk radio host Rush Limbaugh’s July 3 show.

“This is the question,” Limbaugh said. “(Sen.) Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) presents a hypothetical where a minister gives a sermon, quotes the Bible about homosexuality and is thereafter attacked … by a gay activist because of what the minister said about his religious beliefs and what Scripture says about homosexuality. Is the minister protected?”

No, said Holder.

“Well, the statute would not – would not necessarily cover that,” Holder stated. “We’re talking about crimes that have a historic basis. Groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of the color of their skin, their sexual orientation, that is what this statute tends – is designed to cover. We don’t have the indication that the attack was motivated by a person’s desire to strike at somebody who was in one of these protected groups. That would not be covered by the statute.”

Continued Limbaugh, “In other words: ministers and whites are not covered by the hate crime statute because we’re talking about crimes that have a historic basis, groups who have been targeted for violence as a result of their skin color, sexual orientation. So hate crimes are reserved exclusively for blacks and homosexuals. Everybody else can get to the back of the bus on this one.”

WND has reported the plan would give special protections to homosexuals, essentially designating them as a “protected class.” However, it could leave Christian ministers open to prosecution should their teachings be linked to any subsequent offense, by anyone, against a homosexual person. The bill earned its nickname, “The Pedophile Protection Act,” when Rep. Steve King proposed an amendment during its trek through the U.S. House that would specify pedophiles could not use the law to protect their activities.

Majority Democrats flatly refused.

Erik Stanley, senior legal counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund, told WND the move is alarming because “this would be the very first governmental and societal disapproval of a sincerely held religious belief, held by a majority of Americans, namely that homosexual behavior is immoral.

“It’s the first time the federal government is writing into law a disapproval of that belief,” he said.

While he said he doesn’t believe there will be “immediate” prosecutions of pastors and churches for teaching the biblical injunction that homosexual is sin, “I think the effect on speech and religious speech is nonetheless real.”

He said he does expect that pastors soon will begin being called to testify in “hate crime” cases in court “as to what that pastor preaches, what the church teaches, what the Bible teaches.”

“When this happens, there will be a shock wave through pastorates in America,” he said.

Ultimately, he warned that the homosexual advocates who have pushed the “hate crimes” plan consider this law just the first step “toward silencing Christians.”

That’s already documented not only with the development and application of “hate crimes” laws in other nations, but in the “hate crime” related speech codes already existing on many university campuses within the United States, Stanley said.

Staver noted the procedural hurdle still to be overcome: the fact that the “hate crimes” plan is attached to the $680 billion Defense Authorization bill that also includes funding for the F-22 jet program, which Obama opposes.

Staver also noted an amendment to the “hate crimes” measure from Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., that apparently strengthens protections for free speech and religious exercise. It was adopted 78-13 and states “hate crime” laws shall not be “applied … in a manner that infringes” the First Amendment.

“Language designed to protect speech and religion notwithstanding, the hate crimes amendment discriminates against some classes of crime victims and gives special rights based on ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity,’ including sexual fetishes and philias,” Liberty Counsel explained.

“The name of the bill itself (It’s also known as the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill) is telling. Matthew Shepard is touted by homosexual advocates as a hate crime victim, but the evidence now shows he was not targeted because he was homosexual but was killed because of a drug deal,” Liberty Counsel said.

Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, has said such a law – by definition – requires judges to determine what those accused of crimes were thinking.

“This could create a chilling effect on religious speech, connecting innocent expression of religious belief to acts of violence against individuals afforded special protections,” he wrote. “The criminalization of religious speech, such as speech against the practice of homosexuality, has already been seen in other countries with similar hate crimes legislation in place.”

President Obama, supported strongly during his campaign by homosexual advocates, has indicated he would like to see the legislation become law.

“I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance,” he said.

A now-concluded special Fed Ex campaign to warn U.S. Senate members of the dangers of the “hate crimes” plan dispatched more than 705,000 letters to senators.

The letter-writing effort was organized by WND columnist Janet Porter, who also heads theFaith2Action Christian ministry. It allowed citizens to send individually addressed letters to all 100 senators over their own “signature” for only $10.95.

Rick Scarborough of Vision America, Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association, Janet Porter of Faith2Action and many other opponents of hate crimes legislation have been urging voters to immediately contact their senators to oppose the plan.

Concerned individuals maye-mail their respective senators or call 1(877) 851-6437 or 1(202) 224-3121.

Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Flickr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Palin steps down as Alaska governor


Republican VP candidate won’t complete 1st term

By Art Moore

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announcing her resignation today (Screen grab from KTUU-TV, Anchorage, video)

Surprising friends and foes alike, Alaska Republican Gov. Sarah Palin, her party’s vice presidential candidate last year, announced today she will not finish her first term as governor.

Republican Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell will take the oath of office July 26.

Palin, regarded as a potential front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012, made the announcement from the backyard of her home on the shore of Lake Lucille in Wasilla, about 35 miles north of Anchorage.

The governor, her family at her side, emphasized she has been the target of 15 ethics complaints by political opponents – all dismissed – at a cost of $2 million to the state and more than $500,000 to her family.

“And the people who offer up these silly accusations? It doesn’t cost them a dime, so they’re not going to stop draining public resources – spending other people’s money in their game,” she said.

“It’s pretty insane – my staff and I spend most of our day dealing with this instead of progressing our state now.”

Palin anticipated her decision would be questioned.

“I’m determined to take the right path for Alaska, even though it is unconventional, and it’s not so comfortable,” she said.

Palin, 45, made no announcement of her specific plans, but Politico reported she asked supporters after the news conference via the social-networking site Twitter to “stay tuned.”

“We’ll soon attach info on this decision to not seek re-election,” she wrote.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul last September (WND photo)

Palin spokeswoman Meg Stapleton said the governor didn’t make the move to position herself for a 2012 presidential run.

“She is not focused on 2012 – she is focused on making a difference on the topics she finds so dear: energy independence [and] national security,” Stapleton said, according to the Washington Post.

Palin said she made the decision after “prayer and consideration” and a poll of family members, who unanimously concluded she should step down.

Palin indicated ridicule directed at her family weighed in her decision. Last month, CBS “Late Show” host David Letterman joked about one of her daughters being “knocked up” by New York Yankees star Alex Rodriguez during the governor’s visit to New York. Palin said in her resignation announcement today that her 14-month-old son, Trig, who has Down syndrome, had been “mocked and ridiculed by some mean-spirited adults recently.”

A blistering piece on Palin in the current Vanity Fair magazine resurrected alleged tensions within the McCain campaign, asserting some top aides of the Arizona senator worried about Palin’s “mental state” and suggested the governor might have been suffering from post-partum depression following the birth of Trig.

Palin said some observers believe things changed for her when Sen. John McCain tapped her to be his running mate Aug. 29, but “I say others changed.”

She pointed out political operatives immediately “descended on Alaska, digging for dirt.”

“The ethics law I championed became their weapon of choice. Over the past nine months I’ve been accused of all sorts of frivolous ethics violations – such as holding a fish in a photograph, wearing a jacket with a logo on it and answering reporters’ questions.”

She described a “new political environment in which millions of dollars were going down the drain.”

She said she couldn’t let that happen just to remain as governor.

“We know we can affect positive change outside government at this point in time on another scale and actually make a difference for our priorities,” she said.

John McCain, Sarah Palin, Todd Palin with son, Trig, after the Arizona senator’s acceptance speech last September (WND photo)

Palin, who defeated incumbent Gov. Frank Murkowski in the 2006 Republican primary and a former two-term Democratic governor in the general election, said she didn’t want to be a “lame duck” politician.

She explained that she previously had decided not to run for a second term and subsequently determined Alaska would be served best by turning over the governership to Parnell.

“Many just accept that lame duck status and they hit the road,” she said. “They draw a paycheck and they kind of milk it. I’m not going to put Alaskans through that. I promised efficiencies and effectiveness.”

Her brother, Chuck Heath Jr., told Fox News after the announcement she was spending up to 80 percent of her time defending herself from the complaints.

“There was no way she could effectively govern when so much of her time was being spent defending herself,” Heath said.

“It’s not fair to the state, and it’s not fair to her family, and it finally got to the point where she needed to do something.”

Heath said, however, his sister’s announcement today came as a surprise to him.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin announcing her resignation today (Screen grab from KTUU-TV, Anchorage, video)

Fox News analyst and Weekly Standard Editor William Kristol called Palin’s decision a “huge gamble.”

“But some of those gambles have paid off for her in the past,” he said, adding the announcement may turn out to be the first salvo in the 2012 Republican presidential campaign.

Democratic National Committee spokesman Brad Woodhouse said in a written statement that either Palin is “leaving the people of Alaska high and dry to pursue her long-shot national political ambitions or she simply can’t handle the job now that her popularity has dimmed and oil revenues are down.”

“Either way – her decision to abandon her post and the people of Alaska who elected her continues a pattern of bizarre behavior that more than anything else may explain the decision she made today,” Woodhouse said.

Palin burst unexpectedly into the national scene last August when McCain chose her as his presidential running mate.

Her nomination immediately charged up a Republican base that showed little passion for McCain, leading to an enthusiastically received acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in St. Paul amid doubts by some in the party establishment who questioned whether she was qualified.

Palin’s path to the Alaska governorship began as a member of the Wasilla City Council. She served for two terms before election as mayor in 1996. Later, she was elected president of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.

She made an unsuccessful run for lieutenant governor in 2002. One year later, Murkowski appointed her ethics commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. But she resigned in protest in 2004, charging fellow Republicans with a “lack of ethics” for legal violations and conflicts of interest.

In November 2006, with little support from her party, she was elected governor, becoming Alaska’s first to be born after it achieved statehood.

Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Del.icio.us : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Flickr : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cops at man’s home for opposing Obama

Police threaten criminal trespass after delivery of anti-Dem letter

By Chelsea Schilling

A Kansas resident is claiming he has been unfairly threatened by officers after he hand delivered a note to a police department administrator explaining why he will not vote for Obama.

Brent Garner of Lawrence, Kan., told WND he composed an essay on Oct. 29 detailing Obama’s connections with communist Frank Davis and Weatherman William Ayers, the Democrat’s tax plan and his lack of protection for infants born alive following failed abortion procedures.

He then put the letter in an envelope and delivered it to Obama supporter and Lawrence Police Department civilian administrator Kim Murphree, whom he had met at his church.

“She demanded to know what was in the envelope,” Garner said. “I simply told her to read it that it was self-explanatory and then walked off her property. She then began to yell at me and call me names while I was in the street.”

Garner said his wife witnessed the incident from the couple’s minivan.

He then drove home, and a clergyman from his church called him, saying Murphree had complained about the letter. While he was speaking on the phone, only 10-15 minutes following his letter delivery, an officer from the Lawrence Police Department appeared on his doorstep.

“He belligerently demanded to speak with me,” Garner said. “I asked him if I was required to speak with him without an attorney present. He told me no, and I bade him leave my property. He then told me that Kim had lodged a criminal trespass complaint against me and that if I went on her property again I would be arrested.”


Del.icio.us : , , , , , , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , , , , , , ,
Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , ,
Flickr : , , , , , , , , , , ,

Obama’s Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches




Tell your friends, and show them the proof.

Adolf Hitler was well-known to have used hypnosis on crowds to gain power in Germany. (Just Google it if you doubt it.) So why cant this happen in America? It is happening.

Now, this document, An Examination of Obama's Use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches is really spreading. Many people, including young people, are starting to wake up.

Young people have come up with a saying, "Don't drink the kool-aid Obama is pushing on you."

Obama has no accomplishments, we don't know him, he wrote a memoir, he has racist connections, he is using hypnosis, and he thinks he's the Messiah and that he should be in control of the world. We've seen this story before in Germany in the 1930's, haven't we? We know what happened there.

Obama's use of hypnosis in speeches is why:
-nothing sticks to him
-the huge crowds
-the huge money contributions
-the mesmerized effect, especially in young people, who, because of their imaginations are more susceptible to hypnosis (read the document)
-the exorbitant election fraud, rule-breaking and bias in the media
-he gets away with changing every position
-people are calling him the "greatest leader of a generation" with no accomplishments

You have to read this document to understand how his hypnosis works. Logically and rationally, why not get to know this guy a little more before handing the world over to him? Why not wait?

An Examination of Obama's use of Hidden Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches can be found at

The media must  feel compelled to cover this information and decide to let informed people decide.

PS - "Dont drink Obama's Kool-Aid"

Del.icio.us : , , , , , ,
Zooomr : , , , , , ,
Technorati : , , , , , ,
Flickr : , , , , , ,