Big TV

from Mountain wings #6265

Dr. James Twitchell, author of "The
Carnival Culture", says that in our
culture "the average boy or girl will
spend more time in front of the
electronic babysitter by the time they
are age six than they will in
conversation with their father...
for the REST OF THEIR LIVES."

The average male in the United
States will not read a single book
cover to cover after they leave high
school.

The average person spends four hours
a day watching television.

So, if you live to be 72 years old,
that's a dozen years of your life you
will spend watching OTHER people
become millionaires.

Zig Ziglar calls TV the "income
reducer and the morality buster."

Jim Rome says that "poor people have
big TVs, rich people have big libraries."

Gene Roddenbery, the creator of Star Trek,
was giving a commencement address
at Indiana University. He said, "Television
exists for one reason and one reason only."
To entertain? To inform? To educate?"

No, to SELL you something."

Think about it!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
C~B~N gave up TV as I couldn't justify spending the money on it. In other words, it is a luxury....and if you can't afford to pay all your bills, then you give UP the luxuries. I don't know how poor people afford cable and big screen TVs!

At any rate, after 3 months withdrawal, I don't even miss it now. This household has been TV-free for 3 years and 7 months.

We spend $15 a year for a library card to the large town 4 miles away so we can check out books and the occasional video.

Cheap investment if you ask me!
C~B~N


Top of Page

The Sanctity of Life, Not.

Abortion led to Terry Schiavo which will lead to the termination of other mentally challenged individuals which will then lead to those who are terminally ill which will lead to those who are no longer productive members of society, the elderly who just sap the SSI system and insurance etc.

America no longer respects the sanctity of LIFE.

Abortion has led to the belief that life is NOT sacred. Therefore how can we criticize the young, violent men who take that which they want violently?

If you die because your car is being carjacked, or your home robbed, or being mugged; oh well....too bad. Your life is not precious~~ not in a nation that has taught our young people that abortions don't kill human beings.....why be all surprised when the young people don't recognize ANY life as sacred then??????

You reap what you sow; this nation has sown death to the innocent. She now reaps death for ALL.

Top of Page

Have We Lost the Culture War?

By Joe Murray
[C~B~N's comments enclosed]

It's a story we have heard all too often. Girl goes to school. Girl studies extremely hard. Girl becomes valedictorian of her class. Girl asked to address her classmates at her graduation ceremony. Girl wants to thank her family and her friends. Girl wants to acknowledge the Hand of God in her success. High school pulls the plug on girl's microphone. Girl is censored. [Whatcha bet if she were Muslim this wouldn't have happened? ]

Turn back the hands of time only 50 years and this story would have caused a public outcry so loud that Cindy Sheehan would have been green with envy. In post-Western America, however, this story is lucky to raise a few eyebrows.

To those at the helm of the "mainstream" media, this story is info-tainment. Put simply, this news piece, the story of a Nevada teen standing firm for her convictions, is told for the cultural amusement of our societal elitists who look upon Christians as relics that should be displayed alongside the bones of a T-Rex in the American Museum of Natural History.

Enter the Brave New World.

"It is the duty of all Nations," thundered George Washington, "to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors." To Washington, obedience to God would ensure a prosperous and free America. God was the rock upon which our liberties rested. How far we have fallen from the standard espoused by President Washington.

Washington's America is no longer the America of today. The Judeo-Christian compass that once guided our leaders and citizens has been displaced. A new moral order, one fueled by hedonism and a mutated form of individualism, [see the Keith Ellison story below "Oath of Office" as confirmation!] has taken its place. Translation: Christians have become strangers in their own country.

What is the state of our Union's culture?

Poor.

In regards to Christian values, Jesus has not just been moved to the back of the bus, he has been thrown out the emergency exit door. Not only has talk of Jesus, and His Church, been evicted from public discourse, but Jesus has become a favorite target of a cultural elite who have grown intolerant of His nagging presence. [They don't like His truths because if His truths ARE true, then they are sinners headed for damnation.]

On the Fox animated series Family Guy, Jesus was shown as a buffoon who did nothing more than inane magic tricks. On Comedy Central's South Park, Jesus is a half-baked televangelist. Gone are the days of Charlton Heston and The Ten Commandants and here are the days of Tom Hanks and the Da Vinci Code. [I love Tom Hanks' films and Ron Howards' directing; but I was so disappointed these men chose to do this one.]

The cultural pogroms are well under way and Christians are in the cross-hairs.

If one digs deeper into the cultural psyche of America, he will find that Christianity no longer sets the standard for proper human behavior. The Sodomy Squadron has been flying high, for the Supreme Court has deemed sodomy a fundamental right, the Federal Marriage Amendment was DOA, and Massachusetts strong-armed the Catholic Church into ceasing its adoption program when it demanded that a Catholic agency allow same-sex couples to adopt children under the care of the Roman Catholic Church.

In the political sphere, traditionalists have been hit even harder. Despite the fact that the GOP has control of Congress and the White House, this year's "America's Values Agenda" has failed to spread its wings. While the Flag Burning Amendment was only narrowly defeated, the bill to protected the words "one nation under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance became a political Hindenburg. As reported by Associated Press, "Republicans could not muster a simple majority on the issue in a committee where they outnumber Democrats by six."

And the final nail in America's cultural coffin? The American public. In a poll recently conducted by Gallup, just 48 percent of Americans believe that the federal government should "be involved in promoting moral values." Another 48 percent believe the feds should mind its own business. Thus, we have become a nation home to two different peoples, and we Christians constitute the counter-culture.

In 1992 Pat Buchanan declared, "[t]here is a religious war going on in our country for the soul of America. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we will one day be as was the Cold War itself." Thus we have to ask this question: does Christianity's fall to the status of a "counter-culture" mean that the white flag should be raised and the troops sent home?

Not a chance.

When Napoleon marched on Moscow in 1812 to eliminate the Russian threat to his European hegemony, the 500,000 soldiers accompanying him made the French seem unstoppable. Following the bloody Battle of Borodino, which left over 100,000 French and Russian dead, Napoleon made the Czar's Kremlin bedroom his own, positioned his troops within the ruins of Moscow, and waited for the Czar's surrender; and wait he did. With the harshness of the Russian winter staring Napoleon in the eye and no signs of the Moscow's white flag, Napoleon was forced to begin one of the worst retreats in military history. Napoleon may have had the manpower, but he did not have the staying power.

Washington proclaimed, "[o]f all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports." That, my friends, is the key to victory in this culture war.

Yes, the Left has waged an ideological Borodino, is sitting atop the ruins of Washington, and is waiting for the white flag to be raised; but the Left, just like Napoleon, lacks the necessary staying power. Traditionalists, on the other hand, are armed with a secret weapon -- faith in God and a belief in absolute Truths. It is the faith of our Fathers that will sustain us, and it is our unyielding devotion that will run these folks out of DC.

Ben Franklin once mused, "[r]ebellion against tyrants is obedience to God." As this author writes, the other side of the cultural divide is devouring its own with the self-destructive policies it espouses. A Russian winter is looking it in the eye; time is its enemy. Retreat is inevitable and when it begins, the words of Ben Franklin will ring true.

Joe Murray (jrm1835@gmail.com) is a civil rights attorney residing in New Jersey. Murray is a former staff attorney for the American Family Association and has also served as national director of correspondence for Patrick J. Buchanan's 2000 presidential bid. Murray has been a guest on numerous radio and television talk shows, including the O'Reilly Factor.


Top of Page

The (Culture) War of the WORD

By Dennis Prager

A number of years ago I discovered a root cause of America's culture war. It came to me as I debated professor Alan Dershowitz about issues of Jewish concern before a 1,000 Jews at the 92nd Street "Y" in New York City. With the exception of support for Israel, Dershowitz, a Harvard liberal, and I agreed on nothing, political or religious. Toward the end of the evening I came to understand why.

"Ladies and gentlemen," I announced, "the major difference between Alan Dershowitz and me is this: When professor Dershowitz differs with the Torah, he assumes that he is right and the Torah is wrong. When I differ with the Torah, I assume that I am wrong and the Torah is right." Dershowitz responded that for the first time that evening he agreed with me.

That realization was an epiphany for me. I have come to realize that the great divide in values is not between those who believe in God and those who do not but between those who believe in a divine text and those who do not.

This explains in large measure the great culture war in the United States. Americans, of course, are divided not so much by religion as between right and left. Jews and Christians on the left agree with each other on just about every political and social question, and Jews and Christians on the right do the same.

So what distinguishes leftist Jews from rightist Jews and leftist Christians from rightist Christians? It essentially comes down to their belief in the Bible, not their belief in God.

Jews who believe that the Torah is from God agree on almost every important issue of life with Christians who believe that the Torah — and the rest of the Old Testament — is divine. Jews who believe that men (and perhaps women) wrote the Torah agree on virtually every important issue with Christians who also regard the Torah (and the rest of the Bible) as man-made.

For example, as a religious (though non-Orthodox) Jew, I have many differences with Christians' theology. We differ on the Trinity; the divinity of Jesus; the identity of the messiah; the role of Torah, not to mention rabbinic law, on who is and who is not saved; and on such matters as faith versus works. Yet these theological differences cause almost no difference in our social and moral values, which are almost identical.

Why?

Because conservative Jews and Christians share the belief that God revealed a text (a text, moreover, that we share). At the same time, liberal Jews and liberal Christians share the belief that this text is man-made.

Jews and Christians who believe that God revealed the Torah, for example, are far more likely to believe that marriage must remain defined as only between a man and woman, and cannot be redefined to include members of the same sex. They believe that people are not basically good, that human life, not animal life, is sacred (because humans, not animals, are created in God's image), and that murderers should be liable to the death penalty (the only law that is in all five books of the Torah is to put murderers to death).

On the other hand, Jews and Christians who believe that people wrote the Torah are far more likely to support a redefinition of marriage, to view human nature as basically good (and therefore more likely to ascribe human evil to outside influences), to be more receptive to seeing human beings as essentially another animal, and to oppose capital punishment for murderers.

After all, what people, not God, wrote thousands of years ago should hardly serve as a guide to life today — especially when one's heart argues against it. The heart feels compassion for gays, for animals and even for murderers facing execution. And the heart wants to believe that human beings are basically good.

But Jews and Christians who believe in a divinely revealed Bible do not trust the heart as a guide to doing the right thing (indeed, that Bible repeatedly warns us not to). That difference — do I listen to my heart or to what I believe is God's word? — explains most of the differences between right and left. Much more than whether one believes in God.

By Dennis Prager, Dennis Prager's nationally syndicated radio show is heard daily in Los Angeles on KRLA-AM (870). He may be contacted through his website: Dennis Prager Townhall.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I really like reading Dennis Prager's work. I found these two in my email "to be blogged" file which has too many in it! Ah, trying to balance work, family, worship, play, AND blogging can be a challenge! I do the best I can....
C~B~N


Top of Page

Oath of Office

America, Not Keith Ellison, decides what book a congressman takes his oath on

By Dennis Prager
[C~B~N's comments enclosed]

Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim
elected to the United States Congress,
has announced that he will not take his
oath of office on the Bible, but on the
bible of Islam, the Koran.

He should not be allowed to do
so -- not because of any American
hostility to the Koran, but because
the act undermines American
civilization.

First, it is an act of hubris that
perfectly exemplifies multiculturalist
activism -- my culture trumps America's
culture. What Ellison and his Muslim
and leftist supporters are saying is that
it is of no consequence what America
holds as its holiest book; all that matters
is what any individual holds to be his
holiest book.

Forgive me, but America should not
give a hoot what Keith Ellison's favorite
book is. Insofar as a member of Congress
taking an oath to serve America and
uphold its values is concerned, America
is interested in only one book, the Bible.

If you are incapable of taking an oath on
that book, don't serve in Congress. In
your personal life, we will fight for your
right to prefer any other book. We will
even fight for your right to publish cartoons
mocking our Bible. But, Mr. Ellison, America,
not you, decides on what book its public
servants take their oath.

Devotees of multiculturalism and
political correctness who do not see how
damaging to the fabric of American
civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose
his own book need only imagine a racist
elected to Congress.

Would they allow him to choose Hitler's
"Mein Kampf," the Nazis' bible, for his
oath? And if not, why not? On what grounds
will those defending Ellison's right to choose
his favorite book deny that same right to
a racist who is elected to public office?

Of course, Ellison's defenders argue that
Ellison is merely being honest; since he
believes in the Koran and not in the Bible,
he should be allowed, even encouraged,
to put his hand on the book he believes in.

But for all of American history, Jews elected
to public office have taken their oath on the
Bible, even though they do not believe in the
New Testament, and the many secular elected
officials have not believed in the Old
Testament either.

Yet those secular officials did not demand
to take their oaths of office on, say,
the collected works of Voltaire or on a
volume of New York Times editorials,
writings far more significant to some
liberal members of Congress than the Bible.

Nor has one Mormon official demanded
to put his hand on the Book of Mormon.
And it is hard to imagine a scientologist
being allowed to take his oath of office
on a copy of "Dianetics" by L. Ron Hubbard.

So why are we allowing Keith Ellison to
do what no other member of Congress
has ever done -- choose his own most
revered book for his oath?

The answer is obvious -- Ellison is a
Muslim. [Placating the enemy in hopes
of stopping him? Not likely....]

And whoever decides these matters,
not to mention virtually every editorial
page in America, is not going to offend
a Muslim. In fact, many of these people
argue it will be a good thing because
Muslims around the world will see what
an open society America is and how much
Americans honor Muslims and the Koran.

This argument appeals to all those who
believe that one of the greatest goals of
America is to be loved by the world, and
especially by Muslims because then fewer
Muslims will hate us (and therefore fewer
will bomb us).

But these naive people do not appreciate
that America will not change the attitude
of a single American-hating Muslim by
allowing Ellison to substitute the Koran
for the Bible.

In fact, the opposite is more likely: Ellison's
doing so will embolden Islamic extremists
and make new ones, as Islamists, rightly
or wrongly, see the first sign of the realization
of their greatest goal -- the Islamicization
of America.

When all elected officials take their
oaths of office with their hands on the very
same book, they all affirm that some unifying
value system underlies American civilization.

If Keith Ellison is allowed to change that,
he will be doing more damage to the unity
of America and to the value system that
has formed this country than the terrorists
of 9-11. [AMEN. America is a CHRISTIAN nation.
Founded by Christians on Biblical principals.]

It is hard to believe that this is the
legacy most Muslim Americans want
to bequeath to America. But if it is, it is
not only Europe that is in trouble.



Top of Page

Killing Freedom of Speech through the hate crimes bill

This short video shows a little sample of what can happen if the Senate passes S.1105, the "hate crimes" bill.

Watch this unbelievable video and then forward it to others, especially your pastor. It is the story of what happened to a Christian couple when they said that homosexuality is a sin.

Killing Freedom of Speech

Call your state Senators here Time sensitive issue, Call NOW!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The attorney in the video is correct. IF you do NOT speak out, you will LOSE your rights...and the rights of your children and grandchildren.

We either ALL have freedom of speech, or NONE have it.
C~B~N

Top of Page

ENDA bill

Once again, special interests are taking over and attempting to hold hostage the Congress of the United States as well as the American people.

IF it passes, then it seems like all these sexual preferences have just been LEGALIZED and protected!

C~B~N
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A new bill, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), has been introduced in the House of Representatives by homosexual Congressman Barney Frank. The bill (HR 2015) would force organizations such as the Boy Scouts, Veterans of Foreign Wars, day care centers, Christian business owners, adoption agencies, public schools, municipalities and a host of other businesses and organizations to hire homosexual applicants.

ENDA would make it illegal to fire, refuse to hire or refuse to promote an employee based on his or her sexual orientation or "gender identity." Such acts would be considered crimes subject to severe penalties. For a list of the co-sponsors of ENDA, click here. [84 Democrats said YES; 4 Republicans said YES. Can we say Bi-partisan fast enough????]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here is a list of those "Sexual Orientations"

SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS

Coprophilia - sexual arousal associated with feces

Exhibitionism - the act of exposing one’s genitals to an unwilling observer to obtain sexual gratification [LEGAL & Protected now]

Fetishism/Sexual Fetishism - obtaining sexual excitement primarily or exclusively from an inanimate object or a particular part of the body

Frotteurism - approaching an unknown woman from the rear and pressing or rubbing the penis against her buttocks [LEGAL & Protected now]

Gay/Homosexual - people who form sexual relationships primarily or exclusively with members of their own gender

Gerontosexuality - distinct preference for sexual relationships primarily or exclusively with an elderly partner

Incest - sex with a sibling or parent [LEGAL & Protected now]

Kleptophilia - obtaining sexual excitement from stealing

Klismaphilia - erotic pleasure derived from enemas

Lesbian - a homosexual female

Lewdness - sexually unchaste; inciting to lust or debauchery

Masturbation - erotic stimulation of one’s own genitals

Necrophilia - sexual arousal and/or activity with a corpse [LEGAL & Protected now]

Paraphilia - a condition in which a person's sexual arousal and gratification depend on fantasizing about and engaging in sexual behavior that is atypical and extreme

Partialism - A fetish in which a person is sexually attracted to a specific body part exclusive of the person.

Pederasty - Sex between an adult and a child, usually an adult male and a male child. [LEGAL & Protected now]

Pedophilia - Sexual contact between an adult and a child [LEGAL & Protected now]

Bisexual Pedophilia – term used for an adult who derives sexual gratification from sexual contact with a child without regard to the sex of the child
[LEGAL & Protected now]

Heterosexual Pedophilia - term used for an adult who derives sexual gratification from sexual contact with a child of the opposite sex
[LEGAL & Protected now]

Gay Pedophilia - term used for a male adult who derives sexual gratification from sexual contact with a child of the same sex
[LEGAL & Protected now]

Lesbian Pedophilia - term used for a female adult who derives sexual gratification from sexual contact with a child of the same sex
[LEGAL & Protected now]

Prostitution - the act or practice of offering sexual stimulation or intercourse for money [LEGAL & Protected now]

Sexual masochism - obtaining sexual gratification by being subjected to pain or humiliation

Sexual sadism - the intentional infliction of pain or humiliation on another person in order to achieve sexual excitement

Telephone scatalogia - sexual arousal associated with making or receiving obscene phone calls [LEGAL & Protected now]

Toucherism - characterized by a strong desire to touch the breast or genitals of an unknown woman without her consent; often occurs in conjunction with other paraphilia [LEGAL & Protected now]

Transsexual - a person whose gender identity is different from his or her anatomical gender

Transvestite - a person who is sexually stimulated or gratified by wearing the clothes of the other gender

Urophilia - sexual arousal associated with urine

Voyeurism - obtaining sexual arousal by observing people without their consent when they are undressed or engaged in sexual activity [LEGAL & Protected now]

Zoophilia/Bestiality - engaging in sexual activity with animals [LEGAL & Protected now.]

[Maybe we should notify the animal humane society...they seem to get things done to protect animals almost immediately.

Too bad the Senate does not consider humans, especially the young and elderly who cannot protect themselves, as important enough to protect......C~B~N]

Top of Page

The Thought Police

By Chuck Colson

What the Hate Crimes Law Would Do

In George Orwell’s classic novel 1984, the government Thought Police constantly spies on citizens to make sure they are not thinking rebellious thoughts. Thought crimes are severely punished by Big Brother.

1984 was intended as a warning against totalitarian governments that enslave and control their citizens. Never have we needed this warning more urgently than now, because America’s Thought Police are knocking on your door.

Last week the House Judiciary Committee, egged on by radical homosexual groups, passed what can only be called a Thought Crimes bill. It’s called the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. But this bill is not about hate. It’s not even about crime. It’s about outlawing peaceful speech—speech that asserts that homosexual behavior is morally wrong.

Some say we need this law to prevent attacks on homosexuals. But we already have laws against assaults on people and property. Moreover, according to the FBI, crimes against homosexuals in the United States have dropped dramatically in recent years. In 2005, out of 863,000 cases of aggravated assault, just 177 cases were crimes of bias against homosexuals—far less than even 1 percent.

Another problem is that in places where hate crimes laws have been passed, hate crimes have been defined to include verbal attacks—and even peaceful speech. The Thought Police have already prosecuted Christians under hate crimes laws in England, Sweden, Canada, and even in some places in the United States.

If this dangerous law passes, pastors who preach sermons giving the biblical view of homosexuality could be prosecuted. Christian businessmen who refuse to print pro-gay literature could be prosecuted. Groups like Exodus International, which offer therapy to those with unwanted same-sex attraction, could be shut down.

In classic 1984 fashion, peaceful speech will be redefined as a violent attack worthy of punishment.

This is the unspoken goal of activist groups. We know this because during the debate over the bill last week, Congressman Mike Pence (R) of Indiana offered a Freedom of Religion amendment to this hate crimes bill. It asked that nothing in this law limit the religious freedom of any person or group under the Constitution. The committee refused to adopt it. It also refused to adopt amendments protecting other groups from hate crimes—like members of the military, who are often targets of verbal attacks and spitting. They also shot down amendments that would protect the homeless and senior citizens, also often targeted by criminals. Nothing doing, the committee said—the only group they wanted to protect: homosexuals.

Clearly, the intent of this law is not to prevent crime, but to shut down freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of thought. Its passage would strike at the very heart of our democracy.

The full Congress may vote on this bill as early as this week. Unless you want Big Brother telling you what to say, what to think, and what to believe, I urge you to contact your congressman immediately, urging him or her to vote against this bill. If you visit The Breakpoint.org, you’ll find more information about this radical law.

If we do nothing, 1984 will no longer be fiction, and Big Brother will be watching you and me—ready to punish the “wrong” thoughts.

Top of Page

Immigration reform VS. Amnesty

Texas Poll

The latest poll taken by the office
of the Governor of Texas asked
whether people who live in Texas
think illegal immigration is a
serious problem:

35% of respondents answered:
"Yes, it is a serious problem."

65% of respondents answered:
"No es una problema seria."

Now that you have had a laugh....on to the serious debate about this.
C~B~N

*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1

Federal Governments ' Amnesty Bill

[Covered by CNN: Candor in Washington???]

vs.

Oklahoma's Bill 1804

(To get here: Choose "Search Text of Measures". This brings you to the Oklahoma Text search and retrieval system. Enter the numbers "1804" in the search box for ALL measures of the 2007-08 session. Choose #10 at bottom of the new page: 10. hb1804 cs.rtf. This will bring the bill up.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[John Bainer, House Minority Leader says this amnesty bill is a piece of Sh-t!]


The Federal Government's bill

ALLOWS:

1. Legal status after 24 hours [YES HOURS] even if the background check is incomplete [duh, have you EVER KNOWN a government agency to finish ANYTHING within 24 hours??? More like 24 months....]

2. Amnesty is provided to:

a) gang members "who want to leave their gang" [yeah, right. Like that
happens everyday. Gee, think these gang bangers might LIE about this???]

b) those already ordered deported for various reasons:
I.D. thieves; absconders; illegally re-entering once deported.

3. 800 mile fencing for our open borders has been knocked down to 200.

4. English is not required until the 9th year of amnesty.

5. Temporary VISAs are renewable indefinitely...making them PERMANENT.

6. Taxpayers get to pay:

a) the Mexican government so it will offer INCENTIVES for its own people
to STAY in Mexico. Incentives such as EDUCATION for their children and
healthcare.

b) Immigration attorneys to represent illegal aliens

7. Tuition provided for illegals for higher education--money DENIED to LEGAL
residents!!!!!!

8. NO BACK TAXES PAID

9. They will also get the EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT given to TAX
PAYING CITIZENS as a tax break!!!!

10. It allows illegals to "cut to the front of the line" before those who have LEGALLY applied to enter the United States.

vs

Oklahoma's immigration reform bill, House Bill 1804

One News Now

1. It deals with Identity Theft

2. It terminates public assistance benefits to illegals

3. It empowers state and local police to enforce federal immigration laws

4. It punishes employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Which "bill" has TEETH?

Not the FEDERAL one! What takes the feds 500 gazillion pages and such verbosity has been simply done in 19 pages for Oklahoma!

The Oklahoma bill PROTECTS its law-abiding, hard working citizens.

IF the federal bill passes, then I VOTE that imminent domain be applied to every Congressional member and the President of the United States who said YES to this terrible bill!

The LEGAL citizens of the United States will freely give these homes and lands to these newly acquired LEGAL law-breakers.

Lets see how our Federal leaders feel about that!!!

Top of Page

Press *1 for English

"The federal government has a new
citizenship test. They said the old
test for immigrants is too outdated.

Apparently, it was in English."
--Jay Leno

*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1*1

You Tube by Kay and Ron Rivoli

Top of Page

Understanding Jihad

Terrorism Awareness

Sign the Petition


Top of Page

Which are you? Conservative vs. Liberal

I find Daniel Kurtzman's political funnies, well, funny! I recently ran across his
"Identity Quizzes". Take one (or both!) and see what you are!

Conservative Identity Quiz from his How to Win a Fight with a Liberal

Liberal Identity Quiz from his How to Win a Fight with a Conservative


From Daniel Kurtzman himself:

"I'll aim to provide a witty and irreverent look at all the bizarre political antics inside, outside and below the Beltway. Whether you're a pundit, pol, wag, wonk, casual political observer or outright enthusiast, this is one place you're guaranteed to receive a real political education."

Email Daniel Kurtzman: politicalhumor.guide@about.com

Top of Page