Original Article Link - Religious Liberty is the Issue At Stake in the HHS Mandate
The Obama White House and its allies in the media continue to pretend that the controversy over the HHS mandate is all about keeping women from accessing birth control, a claim that’s absurd on its face. For instance, Obama appeared in Iowa on Thursday and tossed out this bit of demagoguery:
We don’t need another political fight about ending a woman’s right to choose, or getting rid of Planned Parenthood — (applause) — or taking away affordable birth control.
No one is trying to take away “affordable birth control.” For that matter, no one is attempting to “get rid” of Planned Parenthood either, although many of us would be happy to see it disappear on its own. The only action taken against Planned Parenthood is to keep taxpayer dollars from flowing into a business that makes almost all of its profit on abortions, and which in at least a number of cases has been exposed as arguably acting outside the law, and certainly outside the bounds of normal ethics when it comes to protecting minors. Taxpayers shouldn’t be subsidizing abortion mills.
In fact, no one is trying to take away anything — except for Barack Obama, Kathleen Sebelius, and the Department of Health and Human Services, which are attempting to strip Americans of one of our most cherished liberties: the freedom of religious expression. For the first time in US history, an administration has arrogated to itself the option of defining religious expression in order to curtail it. Mary Matalin writes about the true stakes in this fight for CNN this weekend:
For the first time in our nation’s history, the government has launched a full-fledged assault on our religious institutions to force them to pay for services that go against their religious convictions. The compromise offered by the administration allowing religious institutions a year to transition to the new system is no compromise. They are still forced to pay for services in direct conflict with their faith or incur severe penalties that could effectively drive them out of business.
This is the most despicable violation of religious liberty that this nation has ever seen. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, archbishop of New York and president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, outlined it best when he said, “In effect, the president is saying we have a year to figure out how to violate our consciences.” A year is a pitiful concession to make when they are essentially telling people that if they do not violate their conscience, the government will put them out of business.
Catholic institutions, however, are not taking this assault lying down. This week, 43 of them have filed lawsuits across the nation challenging the mandate’s intrusion on religious liberty.
This sentiment is felt not only among Catholics but also among Jewish, Protestant and other religious groups. Though these groups do not necessarily have a uniform religious teaching against some of the mandate’s provisions, they do have a uniform agreement that a coercive government does not have the right to say that these religious institutions must violate their consciences.
These religious leaders realize that if government can impose these mandates against conscience rights on Catholics, what other mandates will they impose them on next?
Whatever they can, especially by stoking hysteria over crises that don’t actually exist. In February, I wrote about a study published in 2009 by the CDC which took a 20-year look at the issue. The CDC found that there is no crisis in access to contraception, and in fact the CDC study never mentions access issues at all when finding that 99% of all sexually active women of reproductive age who wanted to use birth control had accessed it:
Employers still have to provide coverage — at no cost, not even copays — for contraception and abortifacients such as “ella” and Plan B, as well as IUDs. Here’s a question few are asking: Why? Obama and his administration insist that women need better access to contraception and abortifacients, but few women have problems accessing them. The CDC reported in 2009 that contraception use wasn’t exactly lacking: “Contraceptive use in the United States is virtually universal among women of reproductive age: 99 percent of all women who had ever had intercourse had used at least one contraceptive method in their lifetime.” Of all the reasons for non-use of contraception in cases of unwanted pregnancy, lack of access doesn’t even make the CDC’s list; almost half of women assumed they couldn’t get pregnant (44 percent), didn’t mind getting pregnant (23 percent), didn’t plan to have sex (14 percent), or worried about the side effects of birth control (16 percent). In fact, the word access appears only once in this study of contraceptive use, and only in the context of health insurance, not contraception.
It’s good to see other religious leaders uniting in this fight. However, are Catholic bishops themselves united? Donald Cardinal Wuerl of Washington DC and Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore discussed on EWTN reports of division among Catholic bishops, calling them an artifact of wishful thinking in the media. The only debate at the USCCB was on timing and strategy, not on opposition to the mandate and its overreach. The bishop that supposedly dissented, according to media reports, was the same one who wrote the USCCB statement against the HHS mandate:
So no, there is no division among the Catholic bishops, either. Unless the White House backs down from the mandate or the Supreme Court throws out the entire ObamaCare law next month, they don’t appear willing to soft-pedal their opposition to it, either, as the coordinated lawsuits that Catholic institutions filed this week demonstrated.
Original Article Link - Gay Scout Activist Challenges Boy Scouts Policy On Homosexuality
Eagle Scout Zach Wahls challenged the Boy Scouts of America’s anti-gay policy today when he delivered three boxes of petitions demanding change, signed by more than 275,000 people.
Wahls, 20, presented the petitions during the Boy Scouts’ National Annual Meeting in Orlando, Fla., on behalf of Jennifer Tyrrell, an Ohio mom who was removed as the den leader of her 7-year-old son’s Cub Scout troop in April because of her sexual orientation. The Boy Scouts are the parent organization of the Cub Scouts.
Wahls is the author of “My Two Moms” and a video of his three-minute speech before Iowa legislators urging them not to pass a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage and civil unions went viral in February.
The Change.org petition called for Tyrrell’s reinstatement and a change in policy for the organization.
“It is time for the Boy Scouts of America to reconsider its policy of exclusivity against gay youth and leaders,” the petition reads. “Please sign this petition to call for an end of discrimination in an organization that is shaping the future.”
The petition has garnered support from celebrities including Ellen DeGeneres, Julianne Moore, Ricky Martin, Jesse Tyler Ferguson and “Hunger Games” star Josh Hutcherson among others.
After delivering the petitions, Wahls met privately with three Boy Scout representatives.
“It went well. It was an honest conversation, but a productive one,” Wahls told ABCNews.com today. “The fact that the meeting happened is a really positive indicator.”
Wahls said the Boy Scout leaders were “receptive” of his ideas and he believes the conversation is a positive first step in overcoming cultural prejudices.
“It’s a dialogue that continues to be difficult for many people,” he said. “But the members of our community are the ones that pay the price, not the organization as a whole.”
Following the meeting, the Boy Scouts released a statement that said they have “no plans” to change their policy.
“The Boy Scouts of America teaches its members to treat those with different opinions with courtesy and respect at all times,” Deron Smith, BSA director of public relations, said in a statement. “Today, Scouting officials accepted signatures from an online petition and shared the purpose of its membership policy.”
“Scouting maintains that is youth development program is not the appropriate environment to introduce or discuss, in any way, same-sex attraction,” he wrote. “Parents and caregivers should have the right to decide when and how to discuss the issue with their children.”
Wahls is not deterred by the statement.
“President Obama said the exact same thing up until the day he endorsed same-sex marriage. I expect we’ll see a similar progression from the Boy Scouts,” he said. “Obviously, this is a very long-standing policy and I don’t think it we’ll see a change today, this week or even this year. But over the coming months, we’ll continue to take steps in this evolution.”
Tyrrell, 32, was not in Florida for the delivery of the petitions, but will join Wahls at the GLAAD Media Awards in San Francisco on Saturday. She told ABCNews.com she is grateful for all of the support.
“I didn’t expect it, of course,” she said. “It’s been humbling. It’s been terrifying. It’s been exciting. It’s been a whole bag of mixed emotions.”
Tyrrell started the petition when she was removed from her year-long position as den leader because of her sexuality.
“I actually felt devastated. I was heartbroken. I cried a lot. I still feel sad about it a lot,” she said. “It’s 2012 and nobody deserved to be treated like that.”
She said that all of this is mostly sad for her 7-year-old son Cruz who is missing out on all of the positive elements of the Boy Scouts.
When asked if Cruz understands what is happening and that one of his moms has become the face of a movement, Tyrrell said, “To the extent of his ability, he knows what’s going on. He’s kind of like, ‘Boo the Boy Scouts.’ He doesn’t understand discrimination. He’s never been taught that. He doesn’t see people by the color of their skin or who they love. He just loves everyone and doesn’t understand how others couldn’t.”
Original Article Link - Report: Chavez’s Cancer Has ‘Entered the End Stage’ (Repent Now Murderer!)
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is seen during a cabinet meeting at Miraflores Palace …
This reporter has been told that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma, an aggressive cancer that has “entered the end stage”. The information and the quote come from a highly respected source close to Chavez and who is in a position to know his medical condition and history. This source says the prognosis is dire and that Chavez is now not expected to live “more than a couple of months at most.” Chavez is running for re-elec tion in Venezuela but several sources–including the one who revealed the exact kind of cancer– have told me that they believe it is doubtful the dictator will live to see the results.
Voting is scheduled for October 7th. Chavez has been treated three times in Cuba but the exact kind of cancer has been a closely guarded state secret.
Reporter’s note: There is only one source for identifying the cancer and for the prognosis quoted in the first part of the above story. This is a person whom your reporter has very good reason to trust, but you should know that there is only one source so far; no other immediate confirmation. All sources asked for and were granted anonymity because to reveal their names could place them in danger or, at the very least cost them their positions.
Editor’s Note: Mortality is the nature of this world. How we behave and how we serve God will determine our future activities after we leave this world. This applies to Princes and paupers alike. Looks like Hugo chose wrong…
Original Article Link - Scientists Late to Recognize Human and Giant Mammal Coexistence (Darwin Fail!)
by Brian Thomas, M.S. | May. 30, 2012
Giant mammals roamed North America during the Ice Age, but were humans among them? A site in Vero Beach on Florida’s East coast contains mammoth, mastodon, giant ground sloth—and human fossils. The problem is that humans were not yet supposed to have been there, according to the standard story told to generations of archaeologists.
When discovered in the early 1900s, researchers insisted that the Vero Beach human remains washed in long after the large mammals fossilized. But new results, like so many other similar reinvestigations of old sites, show they were made at the same time and that humans lived and died in North America long before believed. What took researchers so long to acknowledge that?
The reason why it took so long for the evidence to come to light may be the same reason why fossil evidence of humans and dinosaurs is so scarce.
Archaeologists at the University of Florida analyzed the concentrations of rare earth elements in the various bones from the Vero site, finding that they all statistically matched.1 This evidence shows that they were buried simultaneously, and it contradicts longstanding dogma that humans had not yet arrived in America.
Supposedly, the earliest Americans were the Clovis peoples, who left tool caches in New Mexico caves that researchers discovered in the early and middle 20th century. However, all this new evidence of pre-Clovis peoples is finally forcing a broad scale revision of history.
Nature recently reviewed some of the pre-Clovis evidences that include fossil dung from a cave in Oregon, campsite remains from Chile, stone tools from Salado, Texas,2 and “sites in Tennessee and Florida, where evidence of pre-Clovis mammoth hunting was uncovered in the 1980s and1990s.”3 And now, the Vero Beach evidence adds to the “slow avalanche of findings.”3
Well, the evidence was not slow, but the willingness to investigate and report the evidence has been very slow, since some of these pre-Clovis sites were discovered decades ago. Has some factor other than archaeological evidence played a role in suppressing the evidence of pre-Clovis peoples?
Adherence to a particular narrative apparently holds a stronger sway than evidence contradicting that narrative. For example, one longstanding narrative that held an iron sway for so long among archaeologists told that ancients migrated across the Bering land bridge during the Ice Age, from Asia to America. But lately, some dare to suggest that the ancients instead travelled by boats along the coast, called “coastal migration.” An even more rare dissenting voice suggests that they floated straight across the Atlantic.
Why were these alternative ideas so long in coming? University of Oregon archaeologist Jon Erlandson told Nature, “I was once warned not to write about coastal migration in my dissertation. My adviser said I would ruin my career.”3
If a career can be ruined over as trivial a matter as challenging a North American Ice Age migration story, how much more easily would it be ruined by a researcher challenging the story of dinosaur extinction millions of years before man by daring to consider evidence of human and dinosaurs having lived together?
Certainly, for many years dogmatic adherence to the Clovis-first narrative suppressed the most straightforward interpretation of field evidence for pre-Clovis peoples. Similarly, the dogma of human evolution caused researchers to misidentify human foot bones found in Africa as belonging to an extinct ape.4 Who knows what human fossils may have been discovered in even deeper earth layers, but misidentified because they didn’t fit the evolution narrative?
Torrent, D. New UF study shows early North Americans lived with extinct giant beasts. University of Florida News. Posted on news.ufl.edu May 3, 2012.
Thomas, B. North America’s Oldest Inhabitants Found in Texas. Creation Science Updates. Posted on icr.org April 13, 2011, accessed May 14, 2012.
Curry, A. 2012. Coming to America. Nature. 485(7396): 30-32.
Thomas, B. Human Foot Bone Misidentified as Lucy’s. Creation Science Updates. Posted on icr.org February 18, 2011, accessed May 14, 2012.
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Original Article Link - IBD At Kimberlin Hearing: Walker Handcuffed, 1st Amendment Muzzled
With all of the attention surrounding Brett Kimberlin, I attended Tuesday’s hearing in his “peace order” vs. Aaron Walker in the District Court of Maryland for Montgomery County. In the end, the judge granted Kimberlin’s peace order, and Walker ended up leaving in handcuffs. (If you want to know why Kimberlin is a story, go here.)
This was the second peace order that Kimberlin has filed against Walker, demanding that Walker cease any contact with Kimberlin. In it, Kimberlin claims that Walker has “continually harassed” him with “alarming posts, tweets, alerts that arrive in my email box, which I consider threats to me personally and to my business.” Kimberlin came to court with pages upon pages of threatening emails and tweets that he claimed had resulted from Walker’s blog posts about him. None of them, though, were sent by Walker.
While talking with Kimberlin and his associate Neal Rauhauser, a woman who was a victim’s assistant for Kimberlin came out of the courtroom and said that Walker had been led away in handcuffs.
Here’s what seems to have happened. Although Kimberlin’s first peace order against Walker was eventually thrown out on appeal, it appears that while it was in effect Walker wrote a blog post about Kimberlin. This triggered a Google Alert that Kimberlin had set up. Kimberlin filed criminal charges based on that, apparently claiming that constituted “contact.” The court apparently agreed, and Walker was arrested.
As for why the judge ruled in favor of Kimberlin’s peace order, that’s easier to explain. First, Walker was clearly stressed and high-strung in court, and alienated Judge C.J. Vaughey. He repeatedly interrupted Vaughey, and by the end of the roughly 45-minute hearing Vaughey was clearly annoyed.
Adding to Walker’s difficulties is that Vaughey looks to be in his late 60s at least. He mentioned a few times about being retired. (Apparently it’s common for retired judges to sometimes come back to the bench to help active judges with the caseload.) Many of Vaughey’s statements suggest that he doesn’t spend much time on the Internet. Thus, he’s probably not intimately familiar with things like Google (GOOG) and Twitter and how they work.
It seemed like Walker did himself in when the judge asked, “Where do you see this case going?”
Walker, who has tried to get the Maryland State Attorney to file charges against Kimberlin for filing what Walker claims are false criminal charges against him (see here), replied, “I hope to raise enough consciousness to get the State’s Attorney to file charges.”
“How are you going to do that?” Vaughey asked.
Walker replied, “I’ve been raising awareness. There’s now 400,000 posts on Google discussing him (Kimberlin), and I’m guessing 300,000 of them are not very pleasant. These are people calling for charges to be filed.”
If you are a judge who knows very little about the Internet, Walker has just made it sound as though he’s able to generate all of this Google traffic against Kimberlin. And Vaughey seemed to believe that is what caused Kimberlin to get death threats.
Vaughey then made a remark about what if you disliked a girl and wanted to talk about her chastity. He seemed to think Kimberlin would feel just as violated as that hypothetical girl would feel.
The judge then said that Walker was the type who didn’t want to get into it “mano-y-mano” with Kimberlin but “you want to get together with all of your friends, who have nothing else to do with their time, in this judge’s opinion … and you are creating a conflagration, and you don’t care where it goes. And so you get some freak out in Oklahoma with nothing better to do with his time, so he does the nastiest things he can to this poor gentlemen (Kimberlin). What right does he have to do that?”
“He has no right to do that, your honor,” Walker replied.
“But you incited him,” Vaughey said.
The judge then went into brief discussion on how these things were settled where he grew up in Brooklyn.
At the end, the judge said, “All I’ve learned here is one guy hides behind the sheets while the other guy suffers. I don’t care what (Kimberlin’s) background is. A prostitute can also be raped. He’s an individual, he’s entitled to his own privacy and can’t be threatened. What I didn’t like is these death threats that are coming and his children are reading it. That is nasty and wrong.”
The judge signed off on the peace order, which means that Walker can’t say one word about Kimberlin for six months.
“I find that this is worse than harassment. It’s a nasty, dirty thing to do to somebody … you’ve got people all over writing these things. He’s got 54 pages that he says come directly from you, and he’s got volumes of people who are doing it.”
A few thoughts: First, never represent yourself. Walker clearly needed an attorney.
Second, it seems that Vaughey doesn’t understand how the Internet works. I or anyone else can write a blog post about “Person A” and urge others to write about it. But I have no control over whether other people do that. And I certainly have no control over whether someone sends a threatening email or tweet to Person A after reading my blog post. Surely, the people who send threatening emails and such should face consequences. But as long as I do not write something along the lines of “send Person A a nasty email,” I’m not in anyway at fault. And looking over Aaron Walker’s blog, it’s clear he never told anyone to do such a thing to Kimberlin.
But, according to Vaughey’s reasoning, I would be at fault. If that’s indeed the case, well, you can probably figure out that the First Amendment has just been gutted.
Original Article Link - Texas Twofer: Texas Tea Partier Forces Runoff; Obama’s Guy Loses Primary!
RUSH: Former Texas solicitor general and Tea Party favorite Ted Cruz did indeed get enough votes in yesterday’s Republican primary to deny Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst 50% of the vote, which means there will have to be a runoff in Texas nine weeks from now. It also means that for the third time in three weeks, a Tea Party candidate has successfully taken on a Republican establishment Senate candidate and either beaten them or, as in this case, forced a runoff.
Earlier this month Richard Mourdock in Indiana beat Dick Lugar, just as had Deb Fischer upset two better-known candidates in Nebraska. And yet the Drive-Bys continue to talk about the death of the Tea Party, the Tea Party’s gone, the Tea Party’s a nonfactor. The Republican establishment talks about the death of the Tea Party all because they don’t see it, except on Election Day. And then they see it, and then they hear it, and then they start cursing. The Tea Party started as a protest movement. And of course you can’t miss a protest movement, people showing up at town hall meetings. They move beyond that now. These are people working at the grassroots to get people elected. And it’s working.
Meanwhile, the Occupy Wall Street movement appears to be completely shovel-ready. Where the heck is it? The Wall Street movement, the Occupy Wall Street movement has been nothing but a protest movement. That’s all it’s been. This cannibal, this guy down in Florida, he’s got more in common with the Occupy movement than he does any other group in this country. Well, the same kind of perverted stuff goes on. Maybe not cannibalism, but I mean you’ve got every other example of human depravity going on within the Occupy movement. We never hear anything about the Occupy movement anymore, unless it’s a report about some of their members being arrested for terrorist plots like wanting to blow up bridges or something.
So while the Occupy movement has been busy trying to blow up bridges, the Tea Party has been busy winning primary after primary. See, the Tea Party’s not a movement. The Tea Party is an idea. The Tea Party is a series of ideas. It has a core. Occupy doesn’t have a core. It’s just a bunch of rabble-rousers thrown together. And they are a movement. By the way, speaking of Texas, a major Democrat has bitten the dust. Here it is. A major upset. “In a major upset, longtime US Rep. Silvestre Reyes has lost the race for the Democratic nomination to retain his congressional seat in far West Texas.
“Reyes lost narrowly to former El Paso city councilman Beto O’Rourke. Reyes appeared to be closing the gap,” but he came up short at the end.
He’s 67 years old, first elected to Congress 1966, and he received a rare primary endorsement last month from none other than The One, Barack Hussein Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm. So coattails, anybody? Obama with a rare primary endorsement, and as is somewhat common, Obama endorses you and you are toast, like Kathryn’s computer. (interruption) Well, of course among the Democrats. It’s the Democrat primary. Damn right.
Original Article Link - Seniors Chop Up AARP Cards in Voter ID Protest
Conservative groups are calling on Minnesota seniors to boycott the American Association of Retired Persons over the group’s opposition to the photo identification measure on the November ballot.
To drive their point home, seniors gathered at a Wednesday press conference snipped AARP cards into shreds. They say there are conservative-affiliated groups that can give them the same senior discounts and that share their conviction that requiring a photo ID to vote will reduce voter fraud.
“I’m somewhat disappointed that my dues with AARP might be used against me,” said Joe Remley of White Bear Lake (valued member of AARP since 1996) before he sliced up his card with a pair of scissors. Remley said he has to show a photo identification for almost everything else in life – from a doctor’s visit for his injured hand to a trip to the Ramsey County compost site. “Ramsey county considers the compost heap more sacred than they do the voter booth.”
The protest didn’t faze the AARP of Minnesota, which has seen similar card-shredding protests over its support for the Affordable Care Act and its opposition to privatizing Social Security.
AARP state director Michele Kimball said the group has 670,000 members in Minnesota, and it’s impossible to take policy positions that every single member will back every single time.
“We are staying the course,” said Kimball, whose group has registered with the state to campaign against the November ballot amendment. “This is about concers we have about the unintended consequences (that the amendment could have on) the ability of seniors and the disabled to vote.
Kimball estimates that as many as 64,000 Minnesota seniors could have trouble obtaining the type of photo identification they would need to vote.
But Jeff Davis, president of the Minnesota Majority, disputes the idea that the new ballot amendment would disenfranchise the elderly – even frail nursing home residents who no longer drive. He leads a statewide conservative coalition that is launching the new website ditchAARP.com to encourage seniors to boycott AARP.
“Polls have consistently shown that senior citizens support voter ID,” Davis said. “We think it’s wrong for a membership-based organization to take a position on an issue that’s diametrically opposed to a supermajority of its members….We think most members are simply unaware of the positions they’re taking on some of these issues.”
The website includes a list of conservative organizations that offer the same sort of senior discount cards that AARP members receive.
“They deceived the elderly and they’re dishonest and they’re dishonorable,” said Jack Rogers of the North Metro Tea Party, who said he held on to his expired AARP card just so he could destroy it in protest. “Go away from these people. Don’t be with them.”
AARP’s Kimball said her group is nonpartisan, and nonpolitical and will push ahead with its public information campaign in the months leading up to the November campaign. The group would prefer to see the constitutional amendment defeated so both parties could come together and work on a bipartisan solution to prevent voter fraud without disenfranchising anyone, she said.
Original Article Link - Media Begs Mitt to Denounce Trump, Rush!
RUSH: Okay. So President Obama gives the highest honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, to a Marxist socialist. What is the media narrative? The media narrative is Romney is out of kilter with America because he will not denounce Donald Trump as a supporter. While Obama is honoring Marxists and socialists (Toni Morrison is one as well), the media is ripping Romney to shreds for being out of touch with America because Trump is a supporter and contributor. Last night and this morning, we have a media montage of media people demanding that Romney denounce Trump and me.
RON BROWNSTEIN: Mitt Romney holding back and being fundamentally silent while Trump is bloviating, as he was on Rush Limbaugh.
MARIA CARDONA: (haltingly) He can’t even stand up to Donald Trump, to Rush Limbaugh.
JAMAL SIMMONS: …wouldn’t stand up to Rush Limbaugh.
JOAN WALSH: He feels like you can’t afford to alienate — certainly not Rush Limbaugh.
JIM DEAN: Not only would Mitt Romney not stand up to Donald Trump, but he wouldn’t stand up to Rush Limbaugh.
RUSH: They’re throwing me in there, and I haven’t done anything lately. I haven’t done anything. All I’ve done is survive. It ticks ‘em off. So they throw me in there with Trump, and that means Romney is out of touch. “Romney doesn’t have the slightest idea what to do, what’s going on! He’s not qualified to run this country,” because he won’t denounce me or Trump. Last night on CNN’s Erin Burnett OutFront, the guest was Democrat strategerist Jamal Simmons. Here’s the question: “Mitt Romney said he doesn’t agree with all the people who support him. Does he need come out and say something about Trump?”
SIMMONS: He wouldn’t stand up to Rush Limbaugh, wouldn’t stand up to, uh, Rick Santorole (sic), and now he won’t stand up to Donald Trump. At some point he’s gotta put the lulus back in the cage (snickers) and tell them, “I’d love to have your support, but not in these circumstances.” Meanwhile, the President of the United States spent the day with Madeleine Albright, and Dolores Huerta, and Toni Morrison — you know, bestowing these medals on them. And Mitt Romney (chortling) is with Donald Trump. It’s just a great contrast for the Obama people.
RUSH: It damn well is. It damn well is! Do you think the vast majority of these people relate to Toni Morrison and Dolores Huerta or Trump? Everywhere Donald Trump goes is a sellout. Donald Trump teaches a course at the New School, it’s a sellout. Donald Trump does a lecture on wealth creation, it’s a sellout. I know it’s popular to make Trump a caricature and a joke in the left-wing media, and the same thing with me. But look at this. “Romney’s running around with Trump, and he won’t denounce Limbaugh, and yet there’s our guy, Obama,” with a couple of Marxists! “It’s a great contrast for the Obama people.”
If this were the Soviet Union.
Which it isn’t yet.
RUSH: It’s probably safe to say that Donald Trump and I (singularly or combined) have created more jobs than Obama has, or the Obama administration. We’ve certainly created more jobs than the Democrat Party has in the last three years. This is very, very telling.
It was a chaotic scene with tempers flaring at the latest town hall meeting presented by Congressman Allen West.
Driving into the Mae Volen senior center in Boca Raton, you got a sense of what was coming as the driveway was lined with protest signs against the outspoken freshman. Inside the building were the people behind the signs, and before West even began to speak, the arguing between West supporters and protesters began.
When asked to explain his “military incident” where he was disciplined for shooting a gun past the head of a terrorist nine years ago, West replied by explaining that he would do it again if given the choice because he was saving the lives of his men.
He then added, “If you guys want to talk about me nine years ago, let’s talk about the president doing blow and smoking dope.”
Original Article Link - School Holds Politically Correct Prom (Libtard Alert!)
The principal of a Connecticut high school is defending her decision to end the longtime tradition of allowing students to vote for a prom king and queen over fears that the winners might be bullied.
But students at Kaynor Tech High School in Waterbury, Conn. have accused Principal Lisa Hylwa of bowing to political correctness.
In the past, the prom court was selected by a student vote. But Hylwa said she wanted to keep drama out of the prom and stop bullying. Instead, students who attended prom were invited to put their names in a box and the court was selected randomly.
“A lot of kids just think it’s unfair because you know, it’s a prom tradition,” student Jennifer Buonocore told television station WTNH. The station reported that it was flooded with comments from students wondering why the tradition was changed.
The principal said that all the students deserve an opportunity to participate as prom king and queen.
“This method gives everyone the same opportunity o be a member of the prom court and it supports the positive spirit of our school, period,” Hylwa wrote in a terse email to Fox News Radio. “There is no hidden agenda with this, no reason for ‘hurt feelings’ or adding another issue on to a teenager’s full plate that could ‘spark’ jealousy, ‘mean behavior’ or bullying.”
The principal said the new way of selecting a prom court “eliminates the avenue for the pressure to vote for members of the clique in charge or for any other issues that could open the door to amplified drama which may lead to any type of ‘mean behavior’ or equity controversy.”
She said the traditional method of voting for prom king and king was “beyond obsolete.”
“There was no option for the student or students who did the most for the class to win or a ‘noble’ reason such as a child who was terminally ill winning the prize,” she wrote. “This was a popularity contest with no criteria. The fact is, there are enough popularity contests in high school so why sponsor another one that may have negative consequences?”
“Cliques are real bullies by the way,” she added.
Hylwa said she feared a “Carrie” incident at this year’s prom, referring to the 1976 horror film.
“A student did complain on Facebook and to the school staff that she/he could not sleep the night before because she/he feared being bullied by being selected as prom queen,” she wrote. “It was going to be a mean spirited prank. She was not sure.”
“I was not taking a chance,” the principal said. “Sounds like ‘Carrie’ but we can’t brush it aside in today’s atmosphere. Connecticut has the CT Bullying Law and we are not playing in the Nutmeg state.”
But students like Buonocore said there’s no bullying at the prom.
“I don’t feel like anyone in our class would ever do something like that or in the junior class, that’s just mean and we’re not mean,” she told the television station.
But the principal said the new rules won’t be changed.
“I have no more time to waste on this ‘non story’,” she wrote. “I have a serious job to do.”