Patriot Post 07-43 Digest

26 October 2007 Patriot Vol. 07 No. 43

PatriotPost.US Subscribe - It's Right, It's Free Printer Friendly Current News Today's Opinion Research & Policy Support the Patriot Fund

THE FOUNDATION "The establishment of... Liberty was the Motive which induced me to the Field... it now remains to be my earnest wish and prayer, that the Citizens... make a wise and virtuous use of the blessings placed before them." — George Washington PATRIOT PERSPECTIVE By Mark Alexander Liberty: Earned v. Inherited A dollar earned and a dollar inherited, are both dollars, but generally speaking, a dollar earned has a very different value to its holder than a dollar inherited. This disparity in value correlates with the very different manner in which each dollar was obtained. While some of us squander our money, most hard-working Americans appreciate the value of ever dollar they earn. And while some who inherit wealth also work hard, many such beneficiaries aren't able to comprehend the value of a dollar earned (similar to those who are "heirs" to welfare programs). This lack of understanding results in a worldview I define as "inheritance-welfare liberalism." The character of inheritance-welfare liberals—those who were raised dependent on inheritance rather than self-reliance, and who inherited their wealth, their privilege and their office—is all but indistinguishable from the character and values of those who depend on state welfare. The former group just has vastly more resources than the latter. Liberals are stellar examples of what V.I. Lenin called "useful idiots," Western Leftists who side with Socialists in economic, political and social debates. The heritage and legacy of earned versus inherited liberty is remarkably similar to that of earned versus inherited wealth. Americans who have earned and supported liberty by way of their actions tend to be grateful for such liberty. But those who simply consume this inheritance cannot fully comprehend how to make, in the words of George Washington, "wise and virtuous use of the blessings placed before them." On that note, allow me to relate an extraordinary encounter. Earlier this month, I had the privilege of hearing the Belarus National Christian Choir . Our church has been planting evangelical churches and home-worship fellowships in Former Soviet Republics since the fall of the Iron Curtain. Over the past decade, one of our church elders has led delegations on more than 60 ministry expeditions to FSRs, including Belarus, where they helped establish a Protestant Seminary and three large churches. Years ago, he befriended the director of the Belarus Choir, which is why our church was fortunate enough to enjoy a performance on their tour of the U.S. This chorus of 30 sounded more like 100, their voices lifted up in praise. But I was not so much struck by the worship songs they sang in English, as by those they sang in Russian. These Belarusians, most of whom spent years under the tyrannical rule of the Soviet Union, are now singing Christian worship songs in their native tongue, without fear of being dragged off to the gulags. After so much oppression, I can assure you that not one of these performers takes for granted a single second of the liberty they have earned. I was deeply moved as I listened for the first time to Christian hymns being sung in Russian. And as I sat in the audience, I revisited the memory of an earlier encounter with Russians—20 years ago to the day of that concert. In October 1987, I traveled in the Middle East for several weeks. In some of the countries, I met with U.S. embassy officials. On this particular excursion, I scheduled a stop in Moscow, capital of the land of the living dead, before returning to the U.S. As a private contractor, I was traveling on a work visa in some countries, but went to Moscow as a visitor. Sidebar: I always detested flights on Aeroflot, the official Soviet State airline, not only because of significant safety issues evident to even the most novice aviator, but also because of more mundane health issues. Everyone in the USSR, it seemed, used tobacco, and Aeroflot's enlightened central planners—apparently awash with Stolichnaya, as were too many of their pilots—divined that the smoking sections would not be segregated, fuselage front and back, but left and right. So, no matter where I sat, I was a virtual smoker for hours on end. Speaking of smoking, I was on an Aeroflot flight to Uzbekistan a couple years earlier, and some of the natives were cooking in the aisle, using a makeshift tinfoil pan over an open flame—true story, but I digress... Upon arriving at Sheremetyevo Airport's Terminal 1, I exited the ashtray and, much to my surprise, was greeted by two pallid, humorless gents and two equally humorless uniformed Militsiya regulars. I figured that they were not with the Chamber of Commerce welcoming committee. The suited fellows were representatives of the Soviet Committee for State Security, more commonly known as the Komitet Gosudarstvennoy Bezopasnosti (KGB). Apparently these fellows did not like my travel itinerary prior to arriving in the cold, wet, dingy-gray city of Moscow, even though I had yet to show my passport to anyone. They seized all of my credentials and belongings, and were kind enough to escort me to a "guest house," where I resided for three days whilst they determined what to do with me. It was a bit disconcerting, having no diplomatic "get out of jail free card," and not being extended the courtesy of a call to our embassy in order to let some friendly soul know where I was. Heck, I didn't even know where I was—just north of Moscow somewhere. But I had a bed, table, light and a good supply of brown bread and green water. I was even given two hardboiled eggs on the third day of my visit, just before being returned to Sheremetyevo and put on a flight to Stuttgart. No explanation, and none forthcoming. Now, I share this recollection for this reason: Compared to the generations who suffered under totalitarian rule and are now free to sing Christian hymns in Russian, the three days I spent with my Soviet hosts were even less than a miniscule inconvenience. But for a moment, I lost my freedom without any assurance of gaining it back, and, consequently, acquired a firsthand peek into what the Soviet people, those who survived, endured for 73 years. As a result, I gained a better appreciation for the unalienable Rights of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness—those endowed by our Creator, those brought forth by our Founders, those defended ever since by the blood of Patriots. I also gained a clearer perspective on just how ungrateful some Americans are for the freedoms they have inherited. It is this same reverence for liberty that gave rise to The Patriot and the context which today motivates our entire team of editors, advisors and, we trust, our Patriot readers. Quote of the week "As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner: 'This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality.'Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall, for it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom." — Ronald Reagan at the Brandenburg Gate, Berlin Likewise, the beliefs held by the American Left will not withstand faith, truth or freedom. Open query "Congressmen, openly refusing to live up to their oath of office, exhibit their deep contempt for our Constitution. The question I've not been able to answer satisfactorily is whether that contempt simply mirrors a similar contempt held by most of the American people. I'm sure that if founders such as James Madison, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson were campaigning for the 2008 presidential elections, expressing their vision of the federal government's role, today's Americans would run them out of town on a rail. Does that hostility reflect constitutional ignorance whereby the average American thinks the Constitution authorizes Congress to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote or anything that's a good idea? Or, are Americans contemptuous of the constitutional limitations placed on the federal government?" — Walter Williams This week's 'Braying Jenny' award "There's been way too much emphasis in ideology in the last six-and-a-half years. I want to get back to evidence-based decision making." —Hillary Clinton Let us know what you think: Click here to comment on this section GOVERNMENT & POLITICS News from the Swamp: Bush seeks more war funding President George W. Bush asked Congress this week for another $46 billion to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other pressing national-security needs. Much of the money will go to day-to-day combat operations and provide better protection for our troops, including body armor and mine-resistant vehicles. To date, Congress has authorized over $450 billion for the war, but since the Surrendercrats took over in January, each new funding request has been met with political theatrics, and this one will be no exception. Democrat blowhards Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are constantly comparing war spending to the recent veto of the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) expansion to demonstrate what they call the President's "misplaced priorities." Reid whined, "[President] Bush wants us to rubber stamp another $200 billion in war funds [but veto tax-funded] health insurance for the children of working families." President Bush responded, urging quick action by Congress: "I often hear that war critics oppose my decisions, but still support the troops. Well, I'll take them at their word—and this [funding] is the chance to show it." Demos are likely to cling to their template, however, as there are no plans to review the funding request before the new year when they once again plan to tie funding to ending the war. Of course, they did reintroduce a slightly revised version of their vast SCHIP expansion in the House. Additional funds requested by the President include $742 million for UN peacekeeping assistance in Sudan, $350 million to combat famine in Africa and $500 million for an initiative with Mexico to combat drug trafficking. This anti-drug effort is the largest the U.S. has undertaken in a decade, and it would provide military assistance to the Mexican government as well as training and technical advice to hunt down corrupt officials. In recent months, fighting between drug gangs has claimed numerous lives and has spilled across the U.S. border. In the House: Rep. Stark apologizes Rep. Fortney "Pete" Stark (D-CA) earned our "Braying Jackass" Award last week for saying that our "kids" are sent to Iraq "to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement." He made this outrageous statement during a debate on the SCHIP expansion, mind you. Finally, on Tuesday of this week, after a censure vote failed, Rep. Stark took the floor to offer this apology: "I want to apologize to my—first of all, my colleagues, many of whom I've offended; to the President, his family; to the troops that may have found in my remarks, as were suggested in the [censure] motion that we just voted on, and I do apologize." He then added, "I hope that with this apology I will become as insignificant as I should be." At first, this appeared to be just another "I'm sorry you were offended" apology, but upon further review, while it certainly could have been more precise, we must give Rep. Stark a little credit for swallowing his pride on this one. On the other hand, Stark didn't say, "What I said was wrong and I'm sorry," because Democrats actually believe what he originally said. New & notable legislation President Bush is threatening to veto an appropriations bill for the first time, in part because the Senate rejected his spending requests on education, health research and grants to local communities, passing an extra $10 billion more. Democrats predictably compared the spending to the costs of the Iraq war. Still, there is always room for pork—1,000 earmarks for $562 million in this legislation. This year's total pork is expected to be near $10 billion. Speaking of pork, Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA) introduced the Earmark Reform Act (H.R. 3738), which would cut in half the amount of funds available for appropriations earmarks, working toward eliminating them. One piece of pork that actually went down to defeat was $1 million for a museum remembering the 1969 Woodstock Concert. Upon hearing of the earmark's insertion into a spending bill, the owners of the property donated $4,600 to Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. GOP senator and presidential candidate John McCain (AZ), who spent 1969 (and several other years) in the horrific Hanoi Hilton, responded with an outstanding barb: "Hillary tried to get a million dollars for the Woodstock museum. I understand it was a major cultural and pharmaceutical event. I couldn't attend. I was tied up at the time." The Senate failed to pass the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act (DREAM), a bill allowing young illegal aliens to move toward legality if their plans include college or the military. They must have illegally entered the U.S. with their families before they turned 16. The measure required 60 votes to advance and it got 52. The House passed "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act" (H.R. 505), a bill granting 400,000 "Native Hawaiians" the "right to form a governing entity that could negotiate with the state and federal governments over such issues as control of natural resources, lands and assets," reports USA Today. Just what the nation needs. Rep. Zach Wamp (R-TN) is planning to introduce the United Nations Economic and Social Council Accountability Act (H.R. 3348). The bill would deny part of the U.S. contribution to the UN while its Economic and Social Council continues consulting entities affiliated with terrorist organizations. On another UN note, The Washington Times reports that "Authorities are considering emptying the massive UN headquarters building for at least three years to get a long-delayed renovation project back on track and on budget." Here's hoping those renovations take forever. From the Left: Chinatown donations Hillary Clinton has a knack for raising money from supporters who don't seem to have any as demonstrated by a Los Angeles Times investigation into donations from New York's Chinatown. "Dishwashers, waiters and others whose jobs and dilapidated home addresses seem to make them unpromising targets for political fundraisers are pouring $1,000 and $2,000 contributions into Clinton's campaign treasury," the paper reported this week. Much like the Norman Hsu scandal, in which hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations were traced to families and individuals whose financial profiles did not match their donations, Chinatown residents living below the poverty level are supposedly responsible for contributions that in some cases equal up to one tenth of their yearly wages. Devoted Clintonites? Doubtful. More likely Mrs. Clinton's affluent associates are bypassing federally mandated donation limits by creating phony names and laundering donations through waiters and dishwashers. This is the same illegal tactic that recently landed Hsu in jail. Naturally, the Clintons have rejected all queries into this story as derogatory to Chinese-Americans, a race-baiting tactic that has worked for them in the past. It will take careful investigative journalism to nail Hillary on these fundraising shenanigans, an endeavor in which the Leftmedia will never be accused of engaging. In other donation news, several candidates have received donations from contributors still in diapers. For example, Barack Obama got $2,300 from a two-year-old. The child's sister and brother, ages 13 and nine, also contributed. We're just thankful that McCain-Feingold finally cleaned up this campaign-financing stuff. Campaign watch: Thompson's plan, Giuliani's man GOP presidential candidate Fred Thompson unveiled his "law and order" immigration plan this week—one that would restrict federal funds from going to "sanctuary cities," implement an additional crackdown on employers that hire illegal aliens, and restrict so-called "chain migration." Of the sanctuary cities, Thompson said, "Taxpayer money should not be provided to illegal immigrants." Thompson's final initiative would be to make English the official national language. The end goal, as it should be, is border security. "A country that cannot secure its borders will not remain a sovereign nation, and you cannot have national security without border security." Can we get an "amen"? Meanwhile, Rudy Giuliani's campaign has hired a Catholic priest as a consultant. Monsignor Alan Placa is a longtime friend of Giuliani and officiated at his second (of three) weddings. He is also accused of molesting an altar boy and two former students in the 1970s. Since then, Placa served as a lawyer while the Long Island, New York, diocese dealt with other allegations of abuse by priests. Republican Jindal wins Louisiana governor race Louisiana elected its first non-white governor since Reconstruction last week, with Republican Bobby Jindal winning 54 percent of the vote in an open-primary election. His nearest competitor received just 17 percent of the vote. Jindal, a proud pro-life, anti-tax conservative, is the son of Indian immigrants who earned a 96-percent rating from the American Conservative Union for his three years of service in the House of Representatives. He ran for governor in 2003, but was defeated by Democrat Kathleen Blanco, whose supporters had no qualms about resorting to racist remarks in their campaign against Jindal. Liberal members of the Indian-American "community" took issue with Jindal because of his strong pro-life stance and because he stood against the recent immigration reform package that would have granted amnesty to illegal aliens. This should be taken as a good sign—if liberals are upset, then Jindal must be doing something right. Reid envies Limbaugh Mark Alexander's recent essay, "Anatomy of a BIG Lie: 'Phony Soldiers'," outlined the recent smear attempt by congressional Democrats against radio-talk-show host Rush Limbaugh. In September, Limbaugh characterized as "phony soldiers" leftists who had falsely claimed military service or honors in order to denigrate President Bush and the war in Iraq. The Left went nuts. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, apparently with nothing better to do, crafted a letter condemning Limbaugh, had 40 other Democrat senators sign it and sent it to Mark Mays, CEO of Rush's syndication partner Clear Channel. Mays turned the letter over to Rush, who promptly put it up for auction on eBay, promising to match the sale amount in a donation to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation. The final bid was $2.1 million, which Rush gladly matched. Sen. Reid, however, couldn't let the moment pass. He took the Senate floor last Friday before the auction closed to claim credit for the whole idea: "When I spoke to Mark May [sic], he and I thought this probably wouldn't make much money—a letter, written by Democrat senators, complaining about something." Then patting himself on the back for the donation itself, Reid said, "I don't know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education." We're sure those military families are forever grateful for your "support," Senator. And as Rush responded, "People wouldn't pay a dime for [any other letter you have written], Senator! This one represents an abuse of power... That is why your letter is historic." As a gesture of thanks for the $4.2-million donation, the MC-LEF gave Rush the "Brass [Pair]" Award—much better than a phony peace prize. Let us know what you think: Click here to comment on this section NATIONAL SECURITY Department of Military Readiness: Missile shield In a dismaying display of lack of institutional memory, this week the Bush administration reportedly offered to delay its activation of a national missile-defense system based partly in Europe—to appease the Russians, no less—until "definitive proof" was in hand regarding Iranian missile capability. Definitive proof? Somebody please hand the President a copy of the Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, also known as the 1998 Rumsfeld Report. It reads: "The warning times the U.S. can expect of new, threatening ballistic-missile deployments are being reduced. Under some plausible scenarios... the U.S. might well have little or no warning before operational deployment." In case any skeptics doubt the ability of our adversaries to spring a missile surprise on us, please review the history of Iran's 21 July 1998 Shahab-3 launch, which came a full year earlier than the earliest possible date predicted by then-Deputy SecDef John Hamre. Better yet, review the history of North Korea's 31 August 1998 launch of a three-stage Taepo-Dong 1, which came just one week after then-Joint Chiefs Chairman General Hugh Shelton assured Congress that "the intelligence community can provide the necessary warning of the indigenous development and deployment by a rogue state of an ICBM threat to the United States." If there was one thing we thought we could count on President Bush for, it was to prepare for threats before they fully materialize. In this case, it appears that someone has slipped the President some State Department Kool-Aid. We sincerely hope that someone in the administration who remembers the events of 1998 takes the President aside and reminds him of the relevant history. Warfront with Jihadistan: Blackwater redux Turmoil continues to swirl around Blackwater USA, the private firm that guards U.S. diplomats in Iraq and that has been accused of a string of reckless and deadly security incidents. On Monday, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) accused Blackwater of tax evasion, releasing a letter from the IRS stating Blackwater's classification of a security guard as an independent contractor, instead of as a Blackwater employee, was "without merit." U.S. companies must pay Social Security and federal taxes on their employees, but Blackwater claims its trainees are independent contractors hired by the federal government, not Blackwater employees. "By [so] classifying its armed guards and other personnel... Blackwater has apparently evaded withholding and paying these taxes," said Waxman. Blackwater contends that the U.S. Small Business Administration says that the guards do not have to be classified as company employees and has appealed the IRS ruling. No final determination has been made. Meanwhile, the relationship between Blackwater and its "boss," the U.S. State Department, may be further deteriorating. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ordered that at least one Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) agent accompany each Blackwater-guarded convoy in Baghdad and directed DS to archive audio and video transmissions from Blackwater vehicles to be used as evidence in any future incidents. Rice is also reviewing State's security-contractor operations, and some officials believe she will have to terminate Blackwater's Iraq contract. Further complicating the picture are Blackwater documents that indicate that the State Department turned down its 2005 request to install cameras in Blackwater convoys in response to a false accusation against one of their Baghdad teams—the very thing Secretary Rice now wants done. Blackwater's future is highly uncertain, as is the question of who will protect U.S. diplomats in Iraq. Profiles of valor: Air Force Major Wolak The Patriot recently highlighted the valor of members of SEAL Team 10, whose Operation Redwing mission was to kill a Taliban leader. Only one member of the SEAL team, Petty Officer Marcus Luttrell, survived. Luttrell's evacuation from a deadly combatant zone is, in part, attributed to the actions of Air Force Major Keith Wolak of Seattle, Washington. As commander of an A-10 Thunderbolt, Wolak, or "Wookie," coordinated the search and rescue mission for Luttrell. The mission was perilous due to the mountainous terrain, low ceilings and enemy fire. An MH-47 Chinook helicopter sent to rescue Luttrell's team had already been shot down, killing all 16 on board. Wolak first flew several attack runs to eliminate ground forces, and when the rescue helicopter had only five minutes of fuel remaining, Wolak was able to locate and mark a landing spot in the heavily clouded region. The helicopter crew later said the mission would have failed without Wolak's aid. For his efforts, Wolak was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. Lt. Michael Murphy, the leader of SEAL Team 10, was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor on Monday. He is the first man to be awarded the medal for actions in Afghanistan and the first sailor to receive it since Vietnam. News coverage of the ceremony provided a simple yet profound illustration of the difference between The Washington Times and The Washington Post. On their Web sites, The Times had the story at the top of its home page, while The Post buried it near the bottom under "More Top Stories." The tone of the stories was also predictably different. The Times ended by quoting President Bush: "Our nation is blessed to have volunteers like Michael who risk their lives for our freedom. We're blessed to have mothers and fathers like Maureen and Dan Murphy who raise sons of such courage and character... And we're blessed with the mercy of a loving God who comforts all who grieve." The Post ended by recounting "the worst death toll for U.S. forces on a single day since the war in Afghanistan began in 2001." To The Washington Post, Lt. Murphy was little more than another statistic in "Bush's war." Here in our humble shop, Lt. Murphy is a hero, a role model—and we are deeply indebted for his service to our country. Immigration front: Reform we'd like to see Reinforcing its reputation as defender of the rights of pretty much everyone in the U.S. save those who abide by U.S. law, the ACLU sued the sheriff's department of Otero County, New Mexico, for "civil-rights violations" stemming from raids on suspected illegal aliens. Claiming officers invaded homes without search warrants, soft skulls from the ACLU howled over the "trampling" of constitutional rights of Equal Protection and Due Process. But their fight to grant the same—if not more enhanced—constitutional protections to illegal aliens as, say, U.S. citizens, begs a more substantial question: To whom should constitutional provisions such as Equal Protection apply? Specifically, should illegals enjoy the same rights as U.S. citizens or resident aliens? This is not to say that illegal searches or seizures conducted by government officials should be tolerated, assuming dubious claims like the ACLU's prove legitimate. Even so, granting the same legal protections to those who have entered the U.S. illegally is a slap in the face to those who hold legal U.S. residency or citizenship. In the end, before we second guess actions taken by law-enforcement officers who put their lives on the line, shouldn't we first demand that our lawmakers thoroughly scrutinize the extent to which such "plaintiffs" ought to have constitutional standing? Let us know what you think: Click here to comment on this section BUSINESS & ECONOMY Income Redistribution: Capital-gains taxes Current tax legislation in Congress demonstrates what will be at stake when a new president takes office in 2008. All of the Democrat presidential candidates support increases in capital-gains taxes—an important fact, considering that President Bush's tax cuts are due to expire in 2010. It's clear that the next administration and the next Congress will have the opportunity to completely reshape our current tax structure. Most of the loudest rhetoric these days is not encouraging. Rather than focusing on economic growth and wealth creation, the Democrats' proposals emphasize "fairness" and "equality" —i.e. slowing the economy and punishing wealth creation. This populist rhetoric is, of course, tired and familiar, but as long as the tax increases only affect the rich, the candidates are confident they can win votes. What they forget is that in a free economy, there is no such thing as a tax increase that only affects the rich. When investors and business owners are punished by tax legislation, they are left with less money to invest and less ability to provide employment. Furthermore, the direct effect of an increase in the capital-gains tax is not limited to the wealthiest, as more than 50 percent of Americans own some form of stock. Rep. Charles Rangel (D-New Taxes) has proposed legislation that would reduce the corporate income-tax rate by 4.5 percent, thereby helping the entire economy by encouraging investment and job growth. However, the bill includes corresponding decreases in tax deductions in other areas, and in the end, it stoops to the tax-the-rich ploy of increasing income-tax rates with a "surcharge" of four percent for taxpayers earning $150,000 a year, or couples earning $200,000. Rangel would also increase the capital-gains tax and more than double the tax on private-equity firms' carried interest. Reality check: If the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire and this plan takes effect, the top rate would then be around 44 percent. Taxing the Internet There is currently a moratorium on taxing Internet usage—but it expires on 1 November, which would leave federal, state and local governments free to tax anything from simply getting online to commerce to email. The House managed to pass a four-year extension last week, thus ensuring it can be a brand new political issue in four years rather than actually solving the problem. The Senate is expected to take action soon, but there is certainly no guarantee of success. Still, Sens. John McCain (R-AZ), John Sununu (R-NH) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) are pushing for a permanent ban on taxing the Internet. What a concept. As Tom Schatz of Citizens Against Government Waste points out, "The Internet has become a vital part of our economy and keeping its use tax-free is essential for economic growth. Enacting a permanent ban would provide much-needed consumer and business confidence. It will also keep governments at all levels from tapping into a new pot of money that they can squander on more wasteful spending programs." Therein, of course, lies the problem. Convincing 535 knuckleheads on Capitol Hill that they should deny themselves access to that new pot of money is probably too much to hope for. Environmentalists blame Bush for fires While wildfires destroy homes and property in southern California, the primary concern for some folks is political. "While [President] Bush is attempting to score compassion points with the people of California, let's tell him not to burn Californians by blocking their duly enacted laws," cries a group called Friends of the Earth. "The EPA must allow the state's... "Clean Cars" fuel-emission standards to go forward." In other words, we don't care about the fires, the 1,500 homes destroyed and the $1 billion in property losses—we need to regulate fuel emissions! Friends of the Earth also blames President Bush by proxy for the fires: "No one fire can be blamed on global warming, but there is no doubt that changes in our climate are causing more fires that are more severe." And if the President would just use his authority to order global warming to stop, the problem would be solved. To the contrary, it is environmentalist policies of forest "preservation" ( i.e. no controlled burns, and no brush or dead-tree clearing) that have helped turn the West into one big tinderbox. On the other hand, we must commend the people of Southern California for, by and large, sticking together and displaying some good ol' American resiliency throughout this whole ordeal. Regulatory Commissars: Watering during a drought Georgia Governor Sonny Purdue declared a state of emergency this week for the northern portion of his state, which is experiencing record drought, along with much of the Southeast. Purdue has turned to fellow Republican President Bush for federal aid. Lake Lanier, a 38,000-acre reservoir that supplies drinking water for more than three million Atlanta-area residents, is less than 90 days from drying up, and Purdue wants the Army Corps of Engineers to curb the amount of water that is drained into Florida and Alabama for the protected mussel population. Environmentalists are complaining that the lack of water for mussels will have an adverse affect on the species. Mussels are important to the ecosystem in that they do aid in removing bacteria from the water, but common sense would dictate that the needs of shellfish must come second to the needs of those with an opposable thumb. And meanwhile, Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are routinely watering synthetic-turf fields used by their field-hockey teams. The International Hockey Federation requires that even synthetic grass has to be watered in advance of practice and games for better playing conditions. So while Georgia residents are skipping showers, UNC students will be playing with the sprinklers. Let us know what you think: Click here to comment on this section CULTURE Around the nation: Brotherly love? First Amendment rights carry a hefty price tag in Philadelphia, where city officials recently hiked the annual rent of the local Boy Scouts chapter, the Cradle of Liberty Council, from $1 to $200,000 because of the Council's policy barring homosexuals from membership. City Solicitor Romulo Diaz, Jr., says the chapter "had been put on notice over the last year... to provide evidence that they would not engage in discriminatory practices against gays as either Scout masters or Boy Scouts... They have either not responded or essentially played the victim." The chapter did adopt a non-discrimination policy in 2003 but was overruled by National Council regulations prohibiting chapters from deviating from national rules against involvement by open homosexuals. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled the Boy Scouts have a First Amendment right to disqualify homosexuals from membership. Nevertheless, Philadelphia would rather protect the "rights" of homosexuals, who might possibly prey on the young scouts, giving a grotesque new meaning to the term "City of Brotherly Love." Village Academic Curriculum: Zero tolerance Speaking of birth control, we noted last week that plans are afoot at King Middle School in Portland, Maine, to give children as young as 11 free access to prescription birth control without the knowledge of their parents. This week, a Portland School Committee member is fighting the new ruling with a resolution that would give parents the option to block their child's access to contraceptive pills, patches or injections, and the "morning-after pill" —an abortifacient. The committee will consider the resolution on 7 November. In New Jersey, one second-grade boy, like almost all seven-year-old children, enjoys drawing. In fact, he has drawn all sorts of things, including a skateboarder, a ghost and a tree. But it was his drawing of a stick figure holding a gun that landed him a one-day suspension. He gave the picture to a friend, whose parents turned him in. Of course, Dennis Township Primary School has a zero-tolerance policy on guns—even simple drawings of them. 'Non Compos Mentis': San Fran 'safe injection' The city of San Francisco recently moved to establish the nation's first "safe-injection" site where, according to the Associated Press, "addicts could shoot up heroin, cocaine and other drugs under the supervision of nurses." Hilary McQuie of the Harm Reduction Coalition praised the move, saying, "San Francisco has always been the cutting edge of rational solutions around drug users." But Bertha Madras of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy called the initiative "disconcerting," noting that "[t]he underlying philosophy is, 'we accept drug addiction, we accept the state of affairs as acceptable'." The site, according to the AP, would be "exempt from federal drug laws so users can visit without fear of arrest." On-site staff will provide equipment and oversight for druggies to shoot up. First needle exchange programs, now legally sanctioned and staff-supervised illegal-drug use. Gee, this is almost as bright as giving birth control to 11-year-olds! Faith and Family: ECUSA at it again In another nose-thumbing toward the world Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Diocese of California recently approved giving religious blessings to same-sex couples. Bishop Marc Andrus promised to "continue to represent the Diocese in the ongoing Church and Communion-wide conversations on the full inclusion of LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] people." He added, "I think the resolution properly augments my pastoral goal of caring alike for all of the people of the diocese, not reinforcing damaging distinctions." Hmm, you mean like the "damaging distinctions" made in God's Word? One of the approved prayers for a same-sex blessing ceremony asks God to "look mercifully upon these two women/men who come to you seeking your blessing, and assist them with your grace, that with true fidelity and steadfast love they may honor and keep the promises and vows they make." This issue is still a hot one in the Anglican Communion, mostly due to this type of provocation by liberals who seek nothing but their own agenda. And last... In an effort to prevent another Hurricane Katrina scenario, scientists have unveiled a brilliant plan to alter such weather patterns by steering storms away from heavily populated regions: dropping pulverized car tires or soot into the top of a hurricane. So far, the process is purely theoretical, of course, but they say the storms thus could be significantly weakened. "With small changes to this side or that side of the hurricane we can nudge it and change its track," according to one MIT scientist. "We're starting with computer simulations, then will hopefully experiment on a small weather system." And what could possibly be more realistic and reliable than a computer simulation? While playing God with the weather seems, er, like a leap of faith, scientists are facing an equally difficult hurdle: lawyers. The inevitable lawsuits from small towns that suffer the consequences of a diverted storm have the legal-lotto crowd warning against the quest. MIT has even hired its own "professor of risk management" to sort out the issues. According to one scientist, "The social and legal issues are daunting. If a hurricane were coming toward Miami... and we diverted it, another town or village hit by it would sue us. They'll say the hurricane is no longer an act of God, but that we caused it." Hold the phone. Maybe those wacky global warmists are right. Maybe humans are responsible for hurricanes. Veritas vos Liberabit—Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff. (Please pray for our Patriot Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families—especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.) Let us know what you think: Click here to comment on this section

Subscribe Free http://shekinahshome.blogspot.com www.shekinah-mercantile.com Printer Friendly Patriot Affiliates Comment Blog Shop amazon.com and support The Patriot Useful Links: Reprint Policy, Privacy Policy

*PUBLIUS* The Patriot Post (PatriotPost.US) is protected speech pursuant to the "inalienable rights" of all men, and the First (and Second) Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. In God we trust. 2007 © Publius Press, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

--