Free Republic

Although family members plan to appeal to the Supreme Court, there is no guarantee the case will be heard. Phone numbers to begin a flood response to the White House are posted at the bottom of the article. I agree with Eagle Forum, let's do it!

Buchanan makes strong case that not only is Senator Barack Obama pro-abortion, but that he leads the way in the U.S. Senate with an attitude (proven in Illinois, as well, with his three time legal endorsement of "after delivery" killings of babies) - and this too, a promise to overthrow all state restrictions on abortion.

Radical ... to say the least.

Buchanan also predicts that faithful Catholics will will steer clear of this callous view on life.

I say, look at the state rights attitude here as well. He's vowed to do the same for gay marriage ... and what else.

This is a man obviously who sees himself as King, or something to that effect. I fear the "change" he has in mind.

We all ought to.

Caruba says the war in Georgia is about oil.

He unveils (this is part book review on a new oil book) that Reagan entered into secret pact with Arabs to bring down price of oil and thus bring an end to oil dependent Soviet Russia.

Wonders what Obama and Democrats are thinking as they push hard to the socialist left, and this in the middle of an energy crisis, refusing to develop our own resources.

This too with a remilitarized Russia gobbling up oil, providing guns to oil rich Venezuela, recozying up to Cuba.

Are we paying attention? Or are we about to be blindsided by our political apathy and ignorance of history?

Victory for men's rights, the second amendment, fairness, and equity.

Nor would it hurt to expose and cut off federal and any state subsidies to the NEA.

I hear you.

But just like the libs, we have to move forward on every front ...

One place I think for starters would be to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court out of the education issue ... which in turn removes the federal pressure that exists on local school districts, counties, states, and their courts to rule this or that.

Same thing for family issues.

And that all starts with the locals, cities, counties, and states getting off the “strings always follow” federal doles.

If we fail to do this, any jurisdictional claims will have a hard time when tested by liberal lawyers to hold up in court.

Precisely. Never give in. Never surrender. Something like that.

Classic. Classic. How true. Especially in CA.

Victory for homeschooling and parental rights! Cause to remember that we shouldn't be negative. We've only just begun to fight back!

This outrageous saga continues. Moses is now in jail, the issue is going national. SRJ was on Neal Boortz today. Bryan was in World Net Daily. I'm working on getting Diane Alden to put this on to the Marc Bernier Show. Please pass this on to everyone you know. We need to heat this up.

Good man does his jobs for decades according to the law and along comes an environmental activist and a judicial activist and he's in jail.

This needs to be spread far and wide till it's on every internet website and talk radio show in the country.

Just curious though, since we are dealing with the EPA, an executive agency, is this another example of what a certain presidential candidate promised back in 2000 ... when he said that he was a "different kind of environmentalist."

... I'm still searching for some solid, down to earth, honest to goodness, proof.

I've just contacted Bryan Fischer of Idaho Values Alliance, and things look dim, with no public defense pulled together on such short notice, but with one possible long shot legal response.

I'd like to think this could be reversed with the right kind of public pressure.

If anything, just to expose these rascals and keep them from sticking the screws to yet another and another and another ... but hopefully to help out Mr. Moser as well.

I don’t think you’re catching on to the problem. What gives the United Nations the right to “grant” or “deny” us anything?

The United Nations supposedly was a dispute resolution organization, but in truth was a Soviet designed mechanism against the West, particularly the United States, that more and more is assuming lawmaking powers and as this ridiculous case illustrates, areas of sovereignty, e.g., all of the mass of ocean outside of a tiny two hundred mile radius.

Are they kidding?

And are we that stupid?

They are looking for “outside” sources of permanent income for their operations. Why? Because this permits them to move forward on every front without the consent of the sovereigns they supposedly serve.

Nowadays, even though we are dumb enough to provide 40 percent of their budget, plus extra assessments here and there for military operations for instance, or international “crisis,” that they sometimes moan about us not supporting or giving our lions share ... YET that money doesn’t come without the consent of Congress.

The U.N. has LONGED for the day to tax the air, the sea, the Internet, anything they can claim as theirs as if they were SOVEREIGN of the world (who elected them I wonder? ... NO ONE!) .. and can do as they please about anything.

This is no trivial matter.

LOST needs to get LOST ... and the sooner the better ... and the U.N. too.

Even if the U.N. stuck to its supposed purpose of a diplomacy forum, diplomacy on the stage has been a bad idea from the start.

Once on the stage such diplomacy becomes inflexible. Nations get backed into corners (rather than the face-saving quiet diplomacy that always existed). What’s worse, is that its so-called dispute resolution mechanisms turns into the world choosing up sides, rather than the two nations involved working it out.

It’s like the stupidity of a married couple who gets in an argument calling or going door to door to every neighbor, every relative, every work associate, and having them take sides in the dispute and then posting the results of that vote on CNN.

What do you have then? All kinds of new enemies all over the place. What should have been a dispute between A & B alone, is now a dispute between A through Z.

D & K, for instance, might have been perfect friends until K found out what side D took in the dispute between A & B. It makes every squabble a possible World War.

This is stupidity and entangling alliances in the extreme.

Worse yet, the U.N. has been dominated by a socialist culture, has a Charter that provides not for ONE ELECTED OFFICIAL. Not one. Further, the so-called voting game in the General Assembly is in fact, meaningless in that only the Security Council can authorize actions, with the absolute veto power in the hands of a few nations, including Russia, China, the U.S., England, and France. Three of those nations are not really all that friendly to our interests.

It’s bill of rights was lifted almost precisely as it stood in the old Soviet Constitution ... arrayed with a variety of socialist rights like the right to housing, or health care, or whatever (rather than freedom to work and earn for those things), and then regardless it has an overthrow of all the rights listed clause that states, something along the line of “any of these rights exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations are null and void.”

Same thing in the old Soviet Constitution, just insert the word Soviet Union instead.

Alger Hiss convicted Soviet Spy engineered this boondoggle (the U.N. Charter), and interestingly enough was at FDR’s side when we handed over to the Soviet Union everything we had fought and died for to stop NAZI Germany and Japan.

Reagan called the U.N. the home of “the greatest concentration of communist spies on the planet.” It is also a place that promotes the interest of terrorists and terrorist states.

Can you give me one good reason why we should permit this Trojan Horse to grant or deny us one single thing?

I can’t. I’d rather we shipped it to Beijing or Moscow where it belongs.

Just my opinion, mind you.

The 1991 treaty is still in dispute, beginning with the fact that The Soviet Union (the other party to the Treaty) never ratified it, a common prerequisite in treaty law, or any contractual relationship.

See: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=70902

Just posted a few days ago.

This is not about Chuck, it’s about the issue. In my first post that started this I raised some others like the massive displacement of millions of homeless to put a good face on China, and their continued closing of factories putting unknown millions out of work ... not to protect the environment ... but only as a temporary measure again ... to show what good environmental stewards they are (and how callous they are about human life and the economic needs of their citizens).

This is no bogus story, even the WSJ has given considerable coverage to it (without really raising a stink).

The outcry over those two measure alone ought to be heard far and wide day and night ...

But the other real story about that is the revelation it provides about the political revolution left. When they target a free country they use every means possible to bring it down including a false concern about safety and environment (so that they can get a stranglehold upon the free market and a “legitimate” excuse to strangulate free enterprise) but once in control, the heck with safety and environment.

Attacking the messenger only deflects the issue that so many of us ought to be concerned about.

And I’m not talking about interventionism either, only that we have a relationship, and have had relationships dating back to the 50’s, with Communist states, that tilt in their favor at our expense, and the expense of their millions and billions of ‘citizens.’

Creating an illusion of a good life in Utopia that is not so good, even as it simultaneously pulls down our good life, that would be much better, were we not so blind to the transfers of wealth and technology and the diminishing freedoms and public virtue right here.

Sure, folks are exploiting the Olympics to get the message out. And that just may be because a significant segment of our population never goes beyond the sport page. It could be that we just might inspire a few of them to think out of the batters box.

Maybe not - but the old Moscow boycott got the attention of this former jock.

Democrats and environmentalists opposing energy independence, to include their opposition to the development of Alaskan oil and its huge natural gas find (25 percent of the world's known supply)as well, is bad enough - but Alan Caruba warns of another sneak attack coming our way via the United Nations and LOST.

The UN is looking for an independent and endless source of funds to finance their agenda. It's eye is on Alaska's offshore deposits. This would be a jackpot acquisition. It should be for the U.S..

And may I add, the neocons, new left, and old left libs isolate whomever they will:

Iraq, Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and lest we forget, Russia at the moment as they have expanded NATO over their objections, put missiles in their backyard, etc., but of course, after they updated the Russian infrastructure and military with an enormous influx of Western money, a highly risky (did I say “risky?” I meant “stupid”) relationship between their military and ours, their former KGB (FSB, or whatever the latest) and our FBI, letting them see how we do things, handing over to them stealth technology, look down Radar (now our B-52s can’t go in there low level undetected anymore if they had to), etc.

But China, China has 60,000 students in our country grabbing all our technology, and “free” trade laws that tilt the balance of trade unfairly in their favor, to build the new grave threat to peace and security in the 21st Century.

Note also that the Bush Administration has blocked sales of new F-15’s and other desperately needed military hardware to Taiwan in anticipation of the Olympic games under the same excuse, the fear to offend.

And here I thought Bush believed that either you are for us or against us, and if you are against us, you’re part of the evil axis ... and we’ll hunt you down like dogs.

Amazingly China and Russia weren’t on his list of “evil,” even though they’ve been selling weapons to those evildoers.

Chuck Baldwin doesn't believe Bush should attend the Olympics. FDR snubbed the Berlin games to send a message to the NAZIS, and here the Butchers of Beijing have put to death millions, are increasing the persecution of dissidents as the games approach, have created files on and are promising to spy on foreign journalist, and crack the whip on any who dare to to publish criticisms of them. Bush is afraid of "offending the people of China." But, says Chuck, he will only offend their leaders, and meanwhile, he is offending millions of freedom lovers around the world for giving legitimacy to this regime. Shame on you, Mr. Bush! says Baldwin.

With all that in mind, I have to agree. And what about the millions of poor China pushed out into the wilderness months ago, so they wouldn't be seen? And the factories they've closed in an area as large as Italy, France, Germany and Spain (approximate) just months ago, to stay that way through the Olympics (NO work for six months for ALL those people), just so they can prove to the world that communism/socialism is an environmentally sound way of life! Too bad about all those people out of work though, heh?

But this is all par for the course for Bush, he worships 'free' trade, and so long as there is a growing movement toward private ownership of property in China, who cares about all the other human right, you know, the ones that really define a person, that reach down into their soul and find expression in their families, and friends, and worship, and speech and freedom to criticize and correct the hand of oppression, and to organize private associations of like minded people.

Just this week again, we read in the WSJ of "trouble-makers" going to labor camps in China for taking pictures of the schools in rubble, and for continuing to complain, find answers, seek justice, for the deaths of thousands of children (and in each case, their only child).

Bush is going after Iran and Iran ... when the greatest growing threat in the world is in China. China he embraces like a dear friend.

rrrr ... that was “keeping OUT a man”

sorry

Just a reminder about that valid point.

Bush II made it a policy, especially in 2004, to cut off all election funds to conservative congressional candidates and hand them over to moderates all over the country.

This is just another shot across the bow warning about voting in another establishment man just to say we win against a far left liberal.

If Congress is the key, at least it should be, then keeping a man who has LONG proved himself in the pocket of the left, a man any informed conservative/classical lib NEVER would have wanted for our presidential candidate, is vitally important.

Money does matter. And the whole point of this Campaign Finance Fiasco/Assault on the First Amendment is that McCain did it in the light of day, something he KNEW would silence the political right in the last months of election cycles, and that critical juncture, thus giving the media left even more power to sway the vote come the finish line.

And so, what do we then think he will do with those election funds if elected? Everything in his power to promote true blue through and through conservative constitutionalist congressmen. Not a chance ...

Winning means nothing if it isn’t about defending principle. This is no “small flaw” in the fabric of McCain - he has betrayed your freedom of speech, intentionally, to serve the left who pays for his unprincipled antics.

This is a man born and bread in the Establishment, who the left wing media WANTED as the Republican Candidate, and has ALWAYS sided with ... who they KNOW if elected (even if they’d be even happier with Obama) will do more havoc on the grass roots of the Republican Party - and thus the country - than Obama ever could.

If Obama wins, conservatives will unite against him, and it will revive the conservative and classical liberal movement in the party and in the country.

If McCain wins, this man owned by the left, will do just as Bush did before him, but perhaps with more openness and zest, dismantle what is left of the best of the “conservative,” “pro-constitutional,” “Judeo-Christian” defending party. And this will be so because it’s called “follow the chief.”

Bush II did it, Bush I did it, Reagan’s second term did it, and Nixon did it.

I remind you, Reagan came to power, a legitimate conservative with powerful leadership skills on a very very conservative set of campaign promises, BECAUSE OF THE VERY LIBERAL (SUPPOSEDLY CLUELESS ... NOT!) PRESIDENT JAMES EARL CARTER.

He botched things up so bad, he betrayed so many of our allies, he so weakened our defense, he taxed us so heavily, etc., that he made it ripe for a Reagan.

That’s my point. And it’s the point many are making.

We don’t need another Bush or worse.

And as someone else said, we need to focus on Congress. The presidency is lost either way.

Just my opinion, though. Maybe you can you have something other than a thems against us (Dems against Republicats) argument. I’m all ears.