Frank Friel, director of security at the
The crowd exceed the 30,000 who greeted Obama and Oprah Winfrey in December in
Obama told the crowd the
Here's an update from World Net Daily on the Christian kids art project getting a failed grade. I wrote on this a while back, but in this story we pick up where the school representative is explaining that they do not accept "religious" projects. As you read that, the journalist mentions what they are seeing on the walls in the hallways of the school as well as what is hanging in the room they are doing the interview in. Very funny and hypocritical.
=====================================
=====================================
"To meet our responsibilities, students are required to follow the rules of conduct for their classrooms and the instructions that their teachers give them for class assignments. While the district respects all students' religious freedoms, those freedoms are not a license for students to force the school to display religious messages of their choosing…"
The ADF said the teacher's grading policy banned depictions of "blood, violence, sexual connotations, [or] religious beliefs."
But in practice it was a discriminatory policy, the ADF said in a court motion seeking an immediate injunction against the school.
"Allowing demonic depictions by some students while prohibiting Christian religious expression in artwork by others is a blatant violation of the Constitution," said David Cortman, senior ADF legal counsel.
The lawsuit was filed late last month after the student's artwork was rejected, then he was told he had signed away his First Amendment rights at the beginning of the semester in order to participate in the class.
The ADF's motion noted: "While penalizing A.P.'s religious express, defendants prominently display[ed] in the school's hallway a large painting of a six-limbed Hindu woman riding a swan figure. … Elsewhere, on a hallway bulletin board, there hangs a drawing of a robed sorcerer."
The law firm said the district displays artwork reflecting Hindu, Buddhist and satanic themes all over.
"It is displayed in classrooms (including the very classroom where district officials met to reiterate to A.P. that his Christian religious expression warranted no constitutional protection)," the law firm said.
The lawsuit names as defendants the school district, administrator Robert Fasbender, assistant principal Cale Jackson, and faculty members Julie Millin and Margi Genrich.
"The fact that the student was not only refused a grade on the project, but given two detentions creates "a draconian atmosphere … [that] evinces a manifest hostility toward Christianity," ADF said.
No such "waiver" of the student's First Amendment rights is applicable, either, the firm said.
"A waiver for First Amendment rights will be found only on the basis of clear and compelling evidence that the party understood his rights and intentionally relinquished or abandoned them," the law firm argued.
"At the time he signed the policy, A.P. had no idea that it would be so restriction of religious expression in the class … And the facts show that at the time that A.P. signed the policy, he did not think that including something like a small cross, or a simple scripture verse reference, would be subject to censorship…"
Further, the student is a minor and was denied the opportunity "to seek advice from counsel" before being required to sign, ADF said.
"An incredible fact in this case is that in the very same room in which defendants Jackson, Millin, and Genrich conducted their parent-teacher conference with A.P. and his family – and reiterated their policies banning student religious express in class assignments – defendants displayed student drawings of the Greekgoddess Medusa; a demonic figure with horns, scales, and protruding tongue; several demonic masks; and a drawing of the Grim Reaper, holding a scythe," ADF said.
The injunction is needed immediately because of the passing of time and loss of grades for the student, the law firm said.
"Here, the school permits some religious expression in its classrooms and hallways, so long as it is not Christian religious expression," the ADF said.
Smoking Gun has had to embarrass a “hip-hop star” by doing an investigation on him that shows the straight forward lies Akon has told to get where he is in his fans eyes. The title of the article is below and you can click on the link in the article heading. But it is just another example of how the music industry prays on kids yearning to look to something when it isn’t their Creator.
The platinum-selling R&B artist has fabricated a past as ringleader of a "notorious" car theft ring who spent 4 1/2 years in jail.
Not so fast, Shvarts told the Yale student newspaper.
The university statement is "ultimately inaccurate," she told the paper, which said she told of "repeatedly using a needleless syringe" to insert semen and taking abortifacient herbs to induce bleeding.
"She said she does not know whether or not she was ever pregnant," the newspaper said.
"No one can say with 100 percent certainly that anything in the piece did or did not happen," Shvarts told the newspaper, "because the nature of the piece is that it did not consist of certainties."
An adept reader linked this below in the comments section. Here is the title with the link in it for further reading. I must admit that I am somewhat relieved to find out this additional information. However, my rant still stands... about the Democrats being a party of death... and... stuff.
Yale: Student's Art Project Only 'Creative Fiction'
By JOSH GERSTEIN, Staff Reporter of the Sun | April 17, 2008
A Yale student’s bizarre art project in which she claimed to have repeatedly impregnated and induced abortions in herself is a work of "creative fiction," the university said in a statement this afternoon.
Here are some more articles on the matter and this “freaky” chick:
Aliza Shvarts: Abortion Goo Girl Rants Against the "Patriarchal Heteronormative" – American Digest.
My favorite quote comes from this story:
I guess she showed the heteronormative patriarchy a thing or two about overreacting to, um, serial abortion as a form of highbrow entertainment.
At any rate... enjoy the updates.
This is how fascistic our society is becoming. Where life is considered good enough to stop merely for an art project. I can tell she is a liberal, other than the fact that she is killing the beginning of life without a second thought... I mean the Democratic Party is the Party of Death, by the line that the abortifacient drugs she is taking are herbal. I do not want to paint the “Blue Dog Democrats” into this liberal corner, but definitely the current leaders of the Democratic Party, they are partly to blame for keeping this institution of death so unmanaged while asking people to hand over more than half their earnings when they die, thus affecting the deceased immediate family, who could need that money to make up for the rising food costs incurred by the eviro-“mental” groups that the Democratic Party is wholly sold out to. People like this that are so careless as to end a life to make a point or to shock people are insainly sick. they are 
- however - living out the evolutionary ethic.
Arrrrghhh!
For Senior, Abortion A Medium for Art, Political Discourse
Yale Daily News
Martine Powers
April 17, 2008
Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.
The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts' project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock. Saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.
But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for "shock value."
"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."
The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.
Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.
Art major Juan Castillo '08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.....
....
The only question one should ask is it life. That’s all. This is from a very well written book (44 reviews on Amazon with a 4-1/2 star... pretty good) in study note fashion:
When Does Life Begin?
1. It is uncertain when human life begins; that’s a religious question that cannot be answered by science.
1a. If there is uncertainty about when human life begins, the benefit of the doubt should go to preserving life.
[One of the reasons the Supreme Court allowed the legalization of abortion is that they weren’t sure of when life began.] Suppose there is uncertainty about when human life begins. If a hunter is uncertain whether a movement in the brush is caused by a person, does his uncertainty lead him to fire or not to fire? If you’re driving at night and you think the dark figure ahead on the road may be a child, but it may be just a shadow of a tree, do you drive into it or do you put on the brakes? If we find someone who may be dead or alive, but we’re not sure, what is the best policy? To assume he is alive and try to save him, or to assume he is dead and walk away?
Shouldn’t we give the benefit of the doubt to life? Otherwise we are saying, “This may or may not be a child, therefore it’s all right to destroy it.”
1b. Medical Textbooks and scientific reference works constantly agree that human life begins at conception.
Many people have been told that there is no medical or scientific consensus as to when human life begins. This is simply untrue. Among those scientists who have no vested (monetary) in the abortion issue, there is an overwhelming consensus that human life begins at conception. (Conception is the moment when the egg is fertilized by the sperm, bringing into existence the zygote, which is a genetically distinct individual.)
Dr. Bradley M. Patten’s textbook, Human Embryology, states:
“It is the penetration of the ovum by a spermatozoan and the resultant mingling of the nuclear material each brings to the union that constitutes the culmination of the process of fertilization and marks the initiation of a new individual.”
Dr. Keith L. Moore’s text on embryology, referring to the single cell zygote, says:
“The cell results from fertilization of an oocyte by a sperm and is the beginning of a human being.” He also states, “Each of us started life as a cell called a zygote.”
Doctors J. P. Greenhill and E. A. Friedman, in their work on biology and obstetrics, state:
“The zygote thus formed represents the beginning of a new life.”
Dr. Louis Fridhandler, in the medical textbook Biology of Gestation, refers to fertilization as:
“that wondrous moment that marks the beginning of life for a new unique individual.”
Doctors E. L. Potter and J. M. Craig write in Pathology of the Fetus and the Infant:
“Every time a sperm cell and ovum unite a new being is created which is alive and will continue to live unless its death is brought about by some specific condition.”
Popular scientific reference works reflect this same understanding of when human life begins. Time and Rand McNally’s Atlas of the Human Body states:
“In fusing together, the male and female gametes produce a fertilized single cell, the zygote, which is the start of a new individual.”
In an article on pregnancy, the Encyclopedia Britannica says:
“A new individual is created when the elements of a potent sperm merge with those of a fertile ovum, or egg.”
These sources confidently affirm, with no hint of uncertainty that life begins at conception. They state not a theory or hypothesis and certainly not a religious belief – every one is a secular source. Their conclusion is squarely based on the scientific and medical facts.
1c. Some of the world’s most prominent scientist and physicians testified to a U. S. Senate committee that human life begins at conception.
In 1981, a United States Senate Judiciary Subcommittee invited experts to testify on the question of when life begins. Al of the quotes from the following experts come directly from the official government record of their testimony.
Dr. Alfred M. Bongioanni, professor of pediatrics and obstetrics at the
“I have learned from my earliest medical education that human life begins at the time of conception…. I submit that human life is present throughout this entire sequence from conception to adulthood and that any interruption at any point throughout this time constitutes a termination of a human life….
I am no more prepared to say that these early stages [of development in the womb] represent an incomplete human being than I would be to say that the child prior to the dramatic effects of puberty… is not a human being. This is human life at every stage….”
Dr. Jerome LeJeune, professor of genetics at the
“after fertilization has taken place a new human being has come into being.” He stated that this “is no longer a matter of taste or opinion,” and “not a metaphysical contention, it is plain experimental evidence.” He added, “Each individual has a very neat beginning, at conception.”
Professor Hymie Gordon, Mayo Clinic:
“By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception.”
Professor Micheline Matthews-Roth,
“It is incorrect to say that biological data cannot be decisive…. It is scientifically correct to say that an individual human life begins at conception…. Our laws, one function of which is to help preserve the lives of our people, should be based on accurate scientific data.”
Dr. Watson A. Bowes, University of
“The beginning of a single human life is from a biological point of view as simple and straightforward matter – the beginning is conception. This straightforward biological fact should not be distorted to serve sociological [familial, age, or medical advances], political [pro-choice], or economic goals [cannot finish school].”
A prominent physician points out that at these Senate hearings, “Pro-abortionists, though invited to do so, failed to produce even a single expert witness who could specifically testify that life begins at any other point other than conception or implantation.”
1d. Many other prominent scientists and physicians have likewise affirmed with certainty that human life begins at conception.
Ashley Montague, a geneticist and professor at Harvard and
Dr. Bernard Nathanson, internationally known obstetrician and gynecologist, was co-founder of what is now the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL [Dr. Nathanson help start the entire pro-choice movement]). He owned and operated what was at the time the largest abortion clinic in the Western hemisphere. He was directly involved in over sixty thousand abortions.
Dr. Nathanson’s study of developments in the science of fetology and his use of ultrasound to observe the unborn child in the womb led him to the conclusion that he had made a horrible mistake. Resigning from his lucrative position, Nathanson wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine that he was deeply troubled by his “increasing certainty that I had in fact presided over 60,000 deaths.”
In his film, The Silent Scream, Dr. Nathanson later stated, “Modern technologies have convinced us that beyond question the unborn child is simply another human being, another member of the human community, indistinguishable in every way from us.” Dr. Nathanson wrote Aborting America to inform the public of the realities behind the abortion rights movement of which he had been a primary leader. At the time Dr. Nathanson was an atheist. His conclusions were not even remotely religious, but squarely based on the biological facts.
Dr. Lundrum Shettles was for twenty-seven years attending obstetrician-gynecologist at
“I oppose abortion, I do so, first, because I accept what is biologically manifest – that human life commences at the same time of conception – and, secondly, because I believe it is wrong to take innocent human life under any circumstances. My position is scientific, pragmatic, and humanitarian.”
The official Senate report on Senate Bill 158, the “Human Life Bill,” summarized the issue this way:
“Physicians, biologists, and other scientists agree that conception marks the beginning of the life of a humans being – a being that is and is a member of the human species. There is overwhelming agreement on this point in countless medical, biological, and scientific writings.”
Does It Matter?
In a statement form the The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, Director of Media and Policy Daniel McConchie said:
"Stem cell lines are quickly becoming marketable items. Once some integral human parts can be bought and sold, we run the risk that democratic societies will decide that other weak and defenseless members of the human race in those societies can be utilized for profits as well."
Jews and Blacks were once said by the courts to be less than human, I wonder if we are headed down that path again?
Elitism
For a few days now I have heard the idea of “élite” thrown around by the democrats that show just how out of touch they are on many issues. In fact, if you watch the beginning of this Colbert Report interview of Michelle Obama, elitism is defined as how much money was involved in your upbringing.
Unfortunately, elitism would be a bit closer to this definition... although, this isn’t a proper definition either. Here is a good place to quickly discuss the percentages of whom is in Congress for a reference point:
...that since 1960, a total of only 25 physicians have served in either the U.S. House of Representatives or the Senate, just 1.1 percent of 2,196 members whose records were reviewed.... Records show that from 1789 to 1889, 4.6 percent of Congressional seats were held by physicians. Indeed, 10.7 percent of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were medical practitioners.... Nearly half the members reviewed were lawyers (44.6 percent). Individuals from the business sector (13.6 percent), public service (9.9 percent) and education (7.4 percent) represented the next largest groups in Congress. Physicians were tied for ninth place, behind professionals from military, banking/insurance, and media/entertainment backgrounds. A majority of the 25 physicians were Republican (60 percent), and all but two served in the House of Representatives.
Now to a quick clip by Michelle Obama:
I want to give a definition of elitism that hits closer to home. Take note that a persons upbringing and wealth status does not necessarily matter.
(1) The belief: that government ought in principle, always and everywhere, to be confined to elites. Rarely a worked-out doctrine on its own right, more often a piece of unexamined value judgment, or a view which follows from some more general argument in political philosophy, as for example in Plato’s Republic.
(2) The belief: that government is in practice confined to elites; that, following a maxim of Hume, “ought implies can” (in other words, that there is no point in saying that government ought to be controlled by the people if in practice it cannot); and that we might just as well accept what we are bound to have anyhow. These views are especially associated with Mosca and with Pareto in the early twentieth century, and with Schumpeter in the mid-century. All three writers shade into elitism in sense 1 because they go on to produce normative justifications of rule by elites in a Democracy. However, their earlier arguments do not in themselves imply that if democratic control of government were somehow achievable it would be undesirable.
(3) The belief: that government is in practice confined to elites; that this has often been justified by arguments from Plato or Schumpeter; but that this is undesirable because elite rule is in practice rule on behalf of the vested interests of (usually economic) elites.
(
Now, I will say that since the McCain Feingold law passed, a richer segment of society can only run for office, which is a form of elitism. But so is the fact that lawyers are over represented in Congress, a form of elitism. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy concisely defines elitism as “[t]he belief that in any society there exists of ought to exist groups of those pre-eminent in any given field, including the political.” This same book goes on to say that the term,
“‘élitist’ has lately become a term of abuse, the existence of élites in various areas of life is inevitable consequence of the unequal distribution of human powers combined with a degree of social mobility and division of labor, which enables some of those who excel in a valued field to devote themselves to the development of their talent.”
Some people have natural talents that make them rise above others can often times lead to an elite type of people at times in positions of power or influence. This isn’t always negative. It is almost comical that if these democrats consider themselves feminists or friendly to feminists, that “elitism” is defined in the Feminist Dictionary as the “label used by feminists, from 1969 to 1971, to denounce other feminists who acquired public notoriety. Since feminists had rejected overt structure and hierarchy...”. You see, radical feminism that exists within the Democratic Party ultimately have a radical (some would say elitist) view of political science and man/womyn relations (I spelled woman like feminists do, womyn).
Feminist author Ti-Grace Atkinson shows her true autonomy when stating, “the institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist.” Marilyn French, feminist author calls all men rapists: “All men are rapists and that's all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes.” Gloria Steinen, feminist extraordinaire, wrote the following about Andrea Dwarkin, a contemporary, “Every century, there are a handful of writers who help the human race to evolve. Andrea is one of them.” Wow, such high accolades from one of the most well-known activists in the feminist movement, so what does this Andrea Dworkin have to say about us men? “Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies.”
This from the Feminist Dictionary, whose definitions are self-explanatory:
Some more quotes for clarity:
"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." Catherine MacKinnon in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, p. 129.
"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." From Robin Morgan, "Theory and Practice: Pornography and Rape" in "Going too Far," 1974.
"When a woman reaches orgasm with a man she is only collaborating with the patriarchal system, eroticizing her own oppression..." Sheila Jeffrys.
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." Andrea Dworkin
"Sex is the cross on which women are crucified ... Sex can only be adequately defined as universal rape." Hodee Edwards, ‘Rape defines Sex’
This type of feminist philosophy can be considered elitist. I consider elitist ideas a bit differently. I would say that within the division of the pure modern liberalism versus conservatism, that liberalism is more elitist than conservatism. But that is neither here nor there. The scope of this post is merely to show that the Party of “egalitarianism” separates people by race, gender, and how much money they make, which skews how they interpret “elitism.”
Ethanol is killing children around the world... Democrats! It takes 450lbs of Corn to fill one SUV tank... that is a years worth of food for a child.
In case no one here caught it... there was an Absolute Vodka commercial where an almost MEChA ad is shown. This movement is another Liberation Theological mix of Mexican nationalism, as the official MEChA site hints at. I have written on it. Maybe I will post a video or two I had posted in the past. At any rate, here is a spoof off the original Absolute ad about Obama.
A quick run-down of what MEChA is:
Portions of speeches by MEChA members... yes, this includes Los Angeles Mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa:
One last video about illegal immigration, tomatoes, and Whole Foods Market:
With thanks to Is Barack Obama the Messiah? Blog.
"I'll do whatever he says to do. I'll collect paper cups off the ground to make his pathway clear." -- Halle Berry
"A quantum leap in American consciousness" -- Deepak Chopra
"He is not operating on the same plane as ordinary politicians. . . . the agent of transformation in an age of revolution, as a figure uniquely qualified to open the door to the 21st century." -- Gary Hart
"Barack Obama is our collective representation of our purest hopes, our highest visions and our deepest knowings . . . He's our product out of the all-knowing quantum field of intelligence." -- Eve Konstantine
"This is bigger than Kennedy. . . . This is the New Testament." | "I felt this thrill going up my leg. I mean, I don't have that too often. No, seriously. It's a dramatic event." -- Chris Matthews
"[Obama is ] creative imagination which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom . . . [He is] the man for this time." -- Toni Morrison
"Obama's finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don't even really inspire. They elevate. . . . He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh . . . Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves." -- Ezra Klein
"Obama has the capacity to summon heroic forces from the spiritual depths of ordinary citizens and to unleash therefrom a symphonic chorus of unique creative acts whose common purpose is to tame the soul and alleviate the great challenges facing mankind." -- Gerald Campbell
"We're here to evolve to a higher plane . . . he is an evolved leader . . . [he] has an ear for eloquence and a Tongue dipped in the Unvarnished Truth." -- Oprah Winfrey
“I would characterize the Senate race as being a race where Obama was, let’s say, blessed and highly favored. That’s not routine. There’s something else going on. I think that Obama, his election to the Senate, was divinely ordered. . . . I know that that was God’s plan." -- Bill Rush
In case any of my 3 or 4 readers do not know what is going on in
Now the Democrats (who, again if you remember, said we went to war for oil) want us to get in on the oil deals from
A shale formation stretching
Known as the Bakken Formation, this find would make the recoverable oil in
The recently released assessment shows a 2,800 percent, or 28-times increase in the amount of oil recoverable from the Bakken Formation, compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil.
According to the USGS, the dramatically increased estimate of recoverable oil in the Bakken Formation results from new geological models, advances in drilling and production technologies, and recent oil discoveries.
By the end of 2007, approximately 105 million barrels of oil have been produced from the Bakken Foundation.
"The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest 'continuous' oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS," said a news release making the announcement.
The Bakken Formation lies in "Williston Basin," a geological formation in the north central United States, underlying much of North Dakota, eastern Montana, northwestern South Dakota, and southern Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Canada, according to the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Energy.
The EIA attributes the success of horizontal drilling and fracturing efforts in
