Piece on Nevada Rancher - BLM Land Showdown

I have found the story on the dispute that lead up to the showdown between Nevada Rancher Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management to be difficult to figure out.

Mr. Bundy is in arrears on fees that the BLM has imposed, but I am not versed in the laws that regulate federally-owned land, particularly in regards to those lands that do not serve a specific purpose, such as for a military base. I have read reports that he only stopped paying fees after he was subjected to repeated harassment by BLM bureaucrats. Two years ago it was explained to me that even homeowners whose houses sit on federally-owned land are subjected to surprising restrictions, both as in their usage of the land and the public access that is allowed on un-fenced (what would be thought of by most as "private") property. I always wondered, though, why the US government has insisted that it had the authority to maintain ownership of massive swaths of land not needed for federal use even when territories became states.

One thing is clear - the plundering of wealth by finding one type of flora or fauna to place a block on someone's use of land has gone too far.

For an era in which many Americans place a much higher priority in their own financial security and comfort than on our Liberties, the dispute has taken interesting turns. It seems that people and groups of many different backgrounds and motivations have noted the profound implications of the seizures of Mr. Bundy's cattle and have rallied around him in shows of moral and actual tangible support. People have recognized that a stand must be taken at some point against a federal government that has long engaged in massive overreaches of power, and we are seeing a rare demonstration of the spirit that gave rise to our original Independence movement.

This does not look like a mere repeat of the early 90's Waco, Ruby Ridge, or Freemen sieges. 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/11/militias-head-nevada-ranchers-standoff-feds-were-n/

"Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s decades-long battle against the federal government over grazing rights has heated to the point where militia groups have joined in and taken up spots against the feds who’ve circled his land — and talk is, they’re not afraid to open fire.

A spokesman for the one of the militia groups said as much to local 8 News Now: I’m not “afraid to shoot,” he said.

Margaret Houston, Mr. Bundy’s sister and a cancer survivor, said at a town hall gathering this week that the situation “was like a war zone” and that she felt “like I was not in the United States,” The Daily Mail reported........"

.......Now militia groups are on the scene, promising to help the Bundys keep up the fight.

“This is what we do, we provide armed response,” Jim Lordy, with Operation Mutual Aid, told the local broadcast station. “They have guns. We need guns to protect ourselves from the tyrannical government.”

Mr. Lordy also said “many more” militia groups are coming to the site to join in the Bundy family defense.

“They all tell me they are in the process of mobilizing as we speak,” another member told the Review-Journal.


http://rt.com/usa/bundy-ranch-nevada-tensions-940/

"......As RT reported earlier this week, hundreds of armed agents with the United States Bureau of Land Management and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have descended on the Clark County, Nevada ranch of 67-year-old Cliven Bundy to execute the court-ordered confiscation of nearly 1,000 cattle, according to his family, which the US government says have trespassed on federal property.

The Washington Free Beacon newspaper reported on Monday this week that 234 of the 908 cattle had been wrangled up by government agents and their contractors, and news of the dispute has since further propelled the story into the national spotlight.

Now it’s been reported that local cowboys have retrieved some of the confiscated cattle, and supporters of the Bundy ranch from around the region have flocked to Nevada to stand by their side.

Since the Beacon first reported on the standoff earlier the week, tensions have only worsened in Clark County. Video emerged online on Wednesday of the rancher’s son, Ammon Bundy, bloodied after being shocked by an electric Taser used by authorities, and Desert News reported that, according to Cliven Bundy, his own sister was knocked to the ground by officials moments before cameras began to roll.

One witness, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, told reporters that “Serious bloodshed was narrowly avoided” as a pregnant woman was also roughed up during the ordeal.

"We never did have any hand-to-hand combat this morning or up to his time," Mr. Bundy told the newspaper on Thursday afternoon. "But there's like 200 armed military people on my ranch. That's pretty bad to have that much armed force against American people."......."

Here are three reports that give one serious cause for thought:

http://www.infowars.com/blm-action-in-nevada-is-unconstitutional-heres-why/

"The establishment media is now paying attention to Cliven Bundy and his struggle with the Bureau of Land Management. Most of this coverage assumes Bundy is engaged in illegal cattle grazing on federal land........................

The BLM insists “Mr. Bundy has… failed to comply with multiple court orders to remove his cattle from the federal lands and to end the illegal trespass.”

It is the BLM, not Cliven Bundy, who is in violation of the law and the Constitution, specifically Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17of the Constitution.

The clause, known as the Enclave Clause, authorizes Congress to purchase, own and control land in a state under specific and limited conditions, namely “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings,” and not, as the feds now insist, to protect an endangered tortoise.

The Founders were opposed to providing a centralized federal government with unlimited authority to purchase and, as is routinely the case today, seize state and private land.

During the federal convention debates in September, 1787, Elbridge Gerry, who later went on to serve as vice president under James Madison, contended federal purchase of land “might be made use of to enslave any particular State by buying up its territory, and that the strongholds proposed would be a means of awing the State into an undue obedience.”

In order to make certain the federal government did not abuse the Enclave Clause, the words “Consent of the Legislature of the State” were added.

Madison, Jefferson and the Founders were primarily interested in limited government and the diffusion of federal authority over the states for the protection of individual liberty. In 1992, the Supreme Court issued an opinion on the framers’ reasoning behind the state consent requirement (New York v. U.S):

“The Constitution does not protect the sovereignty of States for the benefit of the States or state governments as abstract political entities, or even for the benefit of the public officials governing the States. To the contrary, the Constitution divides authority between federal and state governmentsfor the protection of individuals. State sovereignty is not just an end in itself: rather,federalism secures to citizens the liberties that derive from the diffusion of sovereign power.”

Madison knew unlimited federal power inevitably results in unbridled tyranny. “I venture to declare it as my opinion that, were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited government established by the people of America,” he wrote..................

Cliven Bundy’s struggle with the BLM in Nevada is exactly the situation Madison and the founders tried to prevent. The federal government does not have the constitutional authority to own land, beyond what is stipulated in the Enclave Clause, and its seizure of land, under the obviously fallacious pretense of protecting a tortoise, is a serious violation of the Constitution.

Madison made if perfectly clear in Federalist Paper 45:

“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined… The [federal powers] will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce… the powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”....."

http://www.infowars.com/breaking-sen-harry-reid-behind-blm-land-grab-of-bundy-ranch/

"The Bureau of Land Management, whose director was Sen. Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) former senior adviser, has purged documents from its web site stating that the agency wants Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s cattle off of the land his family has worked for over 140 years in order to make way for solar panel power stations.

Deleted from BLM.gov but reposted for posterity by the Free Republic, the BLM document entitled “Cattle Trespass Impacts” directly states that Bundy’s cattle “impacts” solar development, more specifically the construction of “utility-scale solar power generation facilities” on “public lands.”

“Non-Governmental Organizations* have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cattle,” the document states.

Another BLM report entitled Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone (BLM Technical Note 444) reveals that Bundy’s land in question is within the “Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone and surrounding area” which is part of a broad U.S. Department of Energy program for “Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States” on land “managed” by BLM........"

*[Note the increasing influence of Non-Governmental Organizations in the US - use search bar in the top right of this page to search for Agenda 21]

http://www.naturalnews.com/044670_BLM_lies_fracking_leases_Bundy_ranch.html#

"The Bureau of Land Management says its 200-man armed siege of the Cliven Bundy ranch in Nevada is all about protecting an "endangered tortoise." But a Natural News investigation has found that BLM is actually in the business of raking in millions of dollars by leasing Nevada lands to energy companies that engage in fracking operations.

This document from the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology(1) shows significant exploratory drilling being conducted in precisely the same area where the Bundy family has been running cattle since the 1870's. The "Gold Butte" area is indicated on the lower right corner of the document (see below), and it clearly shows numerous exploratory drilling operations have been conducted there.
What's also clear is that oil has been found in nearby areas and possibly even within the Gold Butte area itself.

It is, of course, customary for the U.S. government to bring armed soldiers to an oil dispute. (Operation "Iraqi Freedom" for starters...) Heavily armed snipers, helicopters and militarized soldiers have never been invoked over tortoises. (Anyone who thinks this siege is about reptiles is kidding themselves.)......"

[Map of area is in the above link]

Somali Woman Who Fled Islam Disinvited From University Event

I recall when I first read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's story, and the thought of the account still makes me feel terrible. The trauma of being subjected to female genital mutilation (euphemistically referred to as "female circumcision" by its proponents) at the age of five understandably affected her greatly.

She is an outspoken opponent of Islam but is also an atheist. The latter choice, along with the fact that she is an ardent feminist, should be more than enough in the way of credentials to make her the darling of American Academia. 

The problem for her is the former. It was enough for a cabal of faculty of Brandeis University to mount a blacklisting campaign to have her disinvited (that term is fast becoming a common - one worthy of dispensing with the hyphen after "dis") from an commencement event  at the school.

I shudder when I imagine how many radical feminists joined forces with Leftist Muslim sympathizers to run Ms. Ali out of town on a rail. 

One should note the term "core values" as used in the quote from the school in which they explained why they chose to cancel her invitation. "Core Values" is the new litmus test for anyone who is allowed to participate or even - as we saw in the case of Mozilla's co-founder and CEO Brendan Eich, be allowed to keep his job. Core Values encompasses any cause that the left holds dear. If you oppose the maltreatment of girls and women that is common in Islam, do not support the desecration of marriage and the massive overreach of governmental authority that codifies marriages between members of the same gender, or take any position that runs contrary to what the Left cherishes, you are in opposition to the Core Values of a slew of organizations in the United States. Core Values is the new "Americanism" is our dystopian world.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/10/human-rights-activist-slams-universitys-deplorable-move-to-withdraw-honorary-degree-because-of-her-critical-comments-about-islam/

".....Brandeis..University in Massachusetts has decided not to award an honorary degree to a woman who has made comments critical of Islam.

The decision follows complaints from students, faculty members and others about honoring Somali-born Ayaan Hirsi Ali...............

In a 2007 interview with Reason Magazine, Ali was quoted saying that “we are at war with Islam” and urged that Muslims be “defeated.”

The university issued a statement Tuesday night saying it can’t overlook statements “that are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values.”
An online petition created Monday gathered thousands of signatures. And more than 85 of about 350 faculty members signed a letter asking for Ali’s retraction........."

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/04/10/ayaan-hirsi-ali-victim-honor-killing-brandeis-style/

"Brandeis University committed an honor killing this week. The victim was a Somali woman named Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Honor killings are depressingly common in the Middle East: punishment for women guilty of being raped, losing their virginity outside of marriage, adultery, dressing provocatively or simply embarrassing a male relative. These murders – most of which go unreported and unprosecuted – are usually acid-in-the-face, blood-on-the-floor affairs meant not only to salvage the good name of the dishonored family but to intimidate other women (and gay men) into abiding by the prevailing code of behavior.

Ms. Hirsi Ali is an internationally famous crusader against the practice of honor killings and other acts of aggression visited upon Muslim women by their menfolk.
Hirsi Ali’s story is a heroic one, and her persona – Third World woman of color, secular humanist, ardent feminist, defender of gay rights and a near martyr to her liberal Western principles – certainly resonated with the awards committee of a proudly progressive university like Brandeis. She was almost the perfect candidate for an honorary degree.

She comes by her passion honestly. At the age of 5 she was subjected to ritual genital mutilation by her family. As a young woman she rebelled against a traditional forced marriage and fled to the Netherlands, where she received political asylum..........................

She enrolled at a local university, became an avowed atheist and, in 2003, just 11 years after her arrival in her new country, she was elected to the Dutch parliament...........

Hirsi Ali’s story is a heroic one, and her persona – Third World woman of color, secular humanist, ardent feminist, defender of gay rights and a near martyr to her liberal Western principles – certainly resonated with the awards committee of a proudly progressive university like Brandeis. She was almost the perfect candidate for an honorary degree.
But there was one small problem. She had dared to criticize Islam and Muslim behavior in the same way other religions and other human behaviors get criticized in an open society. In America you can’t get killed for this (yet), but you can be dealt with.

Enter Nihad Awad, the national head of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. He launched a letter of protest at Brandeis president Fredrick Lawrence, accusing Hirsi Ali of wrong thoughts and evil words. Giving her an award, he wrote, would be like “promoting the work of white supremacists and anti-Semites.”

That was rich. Awad has publicly supported Hamas (which is anti-Semitic) and Hezbollah, the terrorist arm of the Teheran Holocaust deniers. Not only that: He actually accused Ali of threatening the entire Muslim world with violence. The demand to rescind the award was backed by almost a quarter of the Brandeis faculty.

Faced with this absurd and offensive inversion of reality, President Lawrence informed Hirsi Ali that she was no longer welcome at commencement. He blamed this on “certain of her past statements,” which he said were inconsistent with the university’s “core values.” He had the audacity to invite Hirsi Ali to visit the school someday for a discussion “in the spirit of free expression that has defined Brandeis University through its history.”.........

Ayaan Hirsi Ali deserves her degree for precisely the reason Nihad Awad doesn’t want her to have it – because she dares to speak her mind and say things that offend the sort of people CAIR represents........."

Hank Aaron Shames Himself - Obama Opponents Are Like KKK

I have noted in several previous posts that we are no longer a society that requires any honesty is what is purported to be one's opinion. Credibility means nothing; one can makes the most outrageous statements with no fear of being called a liar.

Well it's his opinion.

OK, but what if it obviously is not?

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Sports/2014/04/08/Hank-Aaron-Compares-Obama-Opponents-to-KKK-They-Wear-Neckties-and-Starched-Shirts-Instead-of-Hoods

When I think of a man who endured a massive amount of abuse and had every reason to fear for the lives of - not only himself, but those of his family, and at the same time digest the fact that he engages in a patently  false conflation of the actions of his tormentors with those of Conservatives, I get sick to my stomach.

Hank Aaron, who combined hard work and determination along with his natural abilities to be the all-time home run champion of Major League Baseball (I will not recognize those who played while using steroids), is a man who knows the harsh reality of race-hatred.

-and that is why he is a liar.

One would have hoped that Aaron would be one of the good guys - an individual who would step up and make it clear that anyone that plays the "race card" solely due to the political beliefs of the opposition is either ignorant or a liar. I saw and experienced real racism, and what you are calling racism is anything but that. He could have made it clear that people who do so are cheapening the abuse and crimes from which many actually suffered and doing nothing to help their position. Instead, he jumped on the bandwagon of lies.

He could have noted that Liberals have been far more successful than the most radical racists at keeping American Blacks from succeeding. Liberals have, by their policies, condemned multiple generations of Blacks to lives in which the only income comes from Welfare. They have relegated them to the status of dependents who are called upon to do little more than vote for their oppressors. 

Not Hammerin' Hank - he would rather blame members of the political party that ended racism, Jim Crow, and Segregation while supporting polices that would enable those of his race to better themselves. 

"On the 40th anniversary of his momentous 715th home run that broke Babe Ruth's MLB home run record, which is the most meaningful in all of sports, Hank Aaron equated Republicans who oppose President Barack Obama's policies to the KKK. 

Aaron implied that conservatives are racists who now wear "neckties and starched shirts" instead of hoods.

In an interview with USA Today's Bob Nightengale on Tuesday, "Hammerin' Hank" lamented that the country has not progressed far enough on race relations, saying that though the nation has a black president, "President Obama is left with his foot stuck in the mud from all of the Republicans with the way he's treated."

"We have moved in the right direction, and there have been improvements, but we still have a long ways to go in the country," Aaron said. "The bigger difference is that back then they had hoods. Now they have neckties and starched shirts."....."

Shame on him. He just flushed his accomplishments and the success at making it through his trials down the drain. His baseball card was one of the first I dug out of my shoe-box to give to my son when he was small; now I couldn't care less if he throws it away so it can be with Aaron's credibility. 

Follow-Up to Sex Trafficking Rescue Post

Last November, I did a brief post on an organization that does some of the most noble and dangerous work imaginable:

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-new-underground-railroad-frees-sex.html

The above  post has extended excerpts that provide a background of the operations of  the Underground Railroad -  one that locates and rescues children from the horrors of sex slavery.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Blaze provided a follow-up to their original story. Glenn Beck notes that the program to collect donations for the organization has had tremendous success. He also gave readers a world map (map and a video are in the link) that shows regions in which child-rape videos have been viewed in "real time". North and South America, Western Europe, and Japan head this sickening list.

The regions that have been blessed with an abundance of food, resources, or financial success have the greatest amount of these predators.

I have a hard time thinking of comments on this awful subject. The fact that people pay to commit crimes on children or to watch these crimes be committed is enough to turn one's stomach, but it is a tragic reality and there is a lot of work to do.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/08/glenn-becks-audience-donated-over-1-million-to-fight-child-sex-trafficking-here-are-some-of-the-kids-they-saved/

"Last November, a friend of Glenn Beck’s revealed that he was leading a double life as a government agent who rescues children from sex slavery. He said that while the government is doing noble work, it is by no means doing as much as it can, and that’s why he started Operation Underground Railroad.

Comprised of former U.S. Military and intelligence officers, the private organization is able to move rapidly and efficiently to save the countless children who are slipping through the cracks. After Beck spoke about Operation Underground Railroad in November, his audience donated over $300,000 in a single day, and over $1 million total.

On Tuesday, Beck was able to reveal the identity of his friend as popular author Tim Ballard. He was also able to show his audience some of what their donations have accomplished so far.

“In the first two months of our operation, we were able to save 35 children,” Ballard said on Beck’s television program Tuesday. “There’s 40 more children on deck that we’ve already seen that we’re about to pull out. These are children that would not have been saved if it were not for your audience.”............

Ballard said most people have no concept of “how real and how huge” of an issue child sex trafficking is. Nearly two million children are trapped as sex slaves, and roughly 90% of them fall out of U.S. jurisdiction.

Ballard said the criminals “never look like bad guys,” and are absolutely everywhere. He even showed Beck a map that can pinpoint where child rape videos are being shared in real time, and it is horrific. For privacy reasons, the map showed only vague geographical areas, but law enforcement has access to the exact addresses. Beck said he’s seen a zoomed-in image of the affluent area where he lives in Texas, and it was terrifying.

Ballard believes the only way the horrific practice will be stopped is if the public rises up and demands an end to it. He believes many have become complacent, as they did during the 1800s, and need to be awoken to the horrors of what’s happening around them..................

“I want you to look into the eyes of evil,” Ballard told him. “I want you to hold slavery in your arms in the form of a child, so you can go back and tell the people what we are doing and what the problem is all about.”

You can read part one of an in-depth account of Mabry’s experience here. Stay tuned to TheBlaze for parts two and three..................."

Supreme Court Lets NM Photographer Ruling Stand

This is a follow up to the below post:

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/08/photographer-found-to-violate-human.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have no idea what the court was thinking by letting previous rulings stand that found that a vendor has no right to exercise his or her conscience. More people are going to be charged with illegal acts of discrimination or violations of human rights, and the accused will want to have their rights upheld by the Court.

This was a terrible decision from all angles; the issue must be settled one way or the other so that both sides know for certain whether or not a major political battle is needed.

The US is sinking into the status of a totalitarian state, and The People are either too unorganized to mount an effective defense or utterly oblivious to the awesome implications of laws and regulations that restrict one's freedom of conscience in a very profound manner.

-and we no longer have a Supreme Court that acts as a final bulwark for our freedoms.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/07/supreme-court-gay-lesbian-marriage-photographer/7304157/

"WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court declined Monday to decide if a New Mexico wedding photographer was within her rights when she refused to work at a same-sex ceremony.The denial leaves standing a decision by the state's highest court that went against the photo studio — although the local dispute has been long since rendered moot.

The case would have posed an important constitutional question with potentially sweeping implications: whether merchants whose products are inherently expressive must serve customers even when it conflicts with their beliefs.

That could include marketers, advertisers, publicists, website designers, writers, videographers and photographers — and perhaps others.

With the same-sex marriage movement winning legal battles state by state, the case could have been one of the most important of the court's next term.

The case featured Elaine Huguenin and her husband Jonathan, whose Albuquerque photo studio informed Vanessa Willock and Misti Collinsworth in 2006 that it only worked "traditional weddings."

Willock and Collinsworth had no trouble finding another photographer for their September 2007 ceremony. But Willock filed a complaint against Elane Photography with the New Mexico Human Rights Commission, charging that the snub violated the state's anti-discrimination law. Twenty other states have similar laws.

The Huguenins have been on the losing side throughout the legal tussle. The commission and the state's Supreme Court ruled that New Mexico's anti-discrimination law forbids for-profit businesses from turning down customers on the basis of sexual orientation. The court said the studio violated that law "in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races."

The Huguenins' petition to the Supreme Court was based on their freedom of speech, which they interpret as the right to decide what messages their photography conveys.

"Of particular relevance here is the Huguenins' sincere religious belief that marriage is the union of a man and a woman," their petition said. "They believe that if they were to communicate a contrary message about marriage — by, for example, telling the story of a polygamous wedding ceremony — they would be disobeying God."
That set the case apart from legislative efforts in some states to establish religious exemptions to anti-discrimination statutes. The Huguenins' lawyers and supporters did not claim that businesses such as restaurants and hotels can refuse to serve gays and lesbians. A measure that could have had that effect was vetoed by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer in February.........."

Gingrich - Radical Gay Agenda is the "New Fascism"

This is a follow up to Friday's post* n the mob-induced firing of Mozilla co-founder Brendan Eich.

*http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2014/04/mob-forces-mozilla-co-founder-from-his.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newt Gingrich makes a good point here, but I have yet to see a current or former national leader tackle the reality of the situation. He rightly notes that the attacks that target one's ability to earn a living simply due to his or her beliefs warrants the label of Fascism, but even he avoids is even more telling. No mention is made of the combined effort of the mob and a government that has taken upon itself the authority to be the grantor of privileges now referred to as rights. He also may have considered noting that our reveling in attacking anything based in truth amounts to a new and dystopian form of chivalry.

-From previous posts:

"...........The foot in the door of asserting a new and dangerously creative power of government sets us up for trouble. Governments are given the authority to regulate marriage to avoid abuses and to confine it to types that are germane to its inherent culture.That's why we don't allow underage brides, multiple brides, or still-married people to marry before obtaining a divorce. Marriage is an institution that falls within the Natural Law. An artificial construct that is the State cannot have, nor can it be allotted, the authority to create. The authority to create is the authority to severely restrict or to take away........"

".......Meanwhile, people.......have joined on the bandwagon of the New Chivalry - attacking anyone who dares to refrain from participating in the destruction of a society. In the late Medieval era, the weak were supposed (Although it seldom worked) to be protected by the strong. Today, the weak are those who refuse to bow to the pressure of the radicals, and they have no protection whatsoever.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/06/gingrich-slams-new-fascism-that-brought-down-mozilla-ceo-over-gay-marriage-views/

-Video is in above link.

"Newt Gingrich ripped into what he called the growing “new fascism” that’s now forcing people out of jobs over their conservative beliefs — noting former Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich, who stepped down last week after public outcry over his $1,000 donation in support of California’s Prop 8, which would have banned same-sex marriage.

“If you’re a young faculty member, in a lot of places, if you’re a young member of a news department, and you have the wrong views, meaning conservative, you have no career,” Gingrich said on “This Week With George Stephanopoulos” Sunday morning.

“This is just the most open, blatant example of the new fascism, which says if you don’t agree with us 100%, we have the right to punish you, unless you’re like Hillary [Clinton] and Barack Obama, and you recant.”...........

[Here the questioner affects to be unable to see the difference between creating new types of marriage by legislative play-acting or court order. Willful misinterpretations of scripture (note that I am not taking a religious position here in any way but one of Liberty) that were used to prevent people of different ethnic groups from marrying are a world apart from creating new forms of marriage out of thin air. The act of pretending to believe that marriage is only a manifestation of romantic love (and one that supposedly warrants the government to overstep its authority to protect Life, Liberty, and Property), is the issue here]

“Where would you draw the line?” ABC’s Jonathan Karl asked Gingrich. “What if he came out against interracial marriage?”

“I think the question is do you want to live in an open and tolerant society, or do you want impose your views at the cost of people’s jobs?” Gingrich replied."

MSNBC Co-Host Surprises All - Says Harry Reid is Liar

This will be very brief tonight as I had a lot to do.

Firstly, the entire reason that the left has suddenly launched a campaign to attack the Koch brothers for the financial support that they give to Republicans (and I assume other Conservatives) is to redirect the attention of The People away from the truly massive amounts of money behind Democratic and other Left-Wing candidates and movements. Soros and Company have been pouring tremendous sums into political campaigns and People-brainwashing hoaxes such as Global Warming/Climate Change.

When the left senses that The People are growing suspicious they immediately engage in large-scale acts of Projection that are coordinated to erupt from all sources at their disposal. That's why your Facebook friends are posting memes that tell you about the evils of the Koch brothers - this despite the fact that what the Koch's are giving is roughly a drop in the bucket compared to what the Left is receiving from the bulk of the Western Oligarchs and the Plutocrats. Instead of a centralized message source such as Big Brother or Pravda/Tass they send out their brainwashing propaganda via multiple outlets. That is why you see videos of Robert Reich in which he tells you that people who are at least trying to protect our Republic are "undermining our democracy". They accuse the opposition of precisely what they are doing.

What surprised me is that an MSNBC host of all people spoke truthfully about Harry Reid. The latter is the one who infamously bore false witnessed (lied) about the reports of individuals who had lost their insurance plans, doctors, and treatments as a result of Obamacare. He lied by referring to these actual accounts as lies.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/04/msnbc-co-host-rails-on-harry-reids-koch-addiction-calls-reid-a-liar-more-than-12-times/

"Friday’s edition of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” opened with an unusual segment. It was 12 minutes of an unfiltered discussion of Harry Reid’s almost-daily attacks on the Koch Brothers.

In the course of the segment, Senate Majority Leader was called a “liar,” said to be “lying about” or spreading “lies” about the Koch brothers more than a dozen times — and that was just by host Joe Scarborough. At the 1:28 mark of the clip, Joe began his rant about Reid by declaring, “It’s embarrassing.”
At the 1:40 mark, Scarborough stated it was his opinion that what Reid was doing was “beneath the dignity of the office he’s holding.”

Joe went on to rack up the aforementioned dozen plus uses of the words liar, lies and lying while referring to Senator Reid’s treatment of the Kochs.

Co-host Mika Brzezinski, and in-studio panelists Jim Vandehei of Politico, and “Morning Joe” regulars Willie Geist, and Katty Kay were silent for much of the segment, speaking only when called upon to join the uncomfortable conversation........."

Bravo. I will always  give credit where credit is due, and this guy spoke truthfully while sitting in the Lion's Den.

Mob Forces Mozilla Co-founder From His Job for Protecting Marriage

As the Orwellian darkness envelops the US, the State need only act as as assistant to totalitarianism. The mob will do the bulk of the work.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/3/prop-8-donation-does-mozilla-ceo-brenden-eich-comp/

"Brendan Eich, the co-founder of Mozilla, has stepped down as CEO over the controversy that erupted after his $1,000 pledge in support of California’s anti-gay marriage law Proposition 8 became widely known.
“Mozilla prides itself on being held to a different standard and, this past week, we didn’t live up to it. We know why people are hurt and angry, and they are right: it’s because we haven’t stayed true to ourselves,” read a statement from Mozilla. “We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.”.............

“It’s clear that Brendan cannot lead Mozilla in this setting,” Mozilla executive chairwoman Mitchell Baker said in an interview Thursday morning, the technology website Recode reported. “The ability to lead — particularly for the CEO — is fundamental to the role and that is not possible here.”

Mr. Eich had insisted that his personal views did not affect his ability to lead the company, noting that Mozilla had been extremely friendly to the gay and lesbian community for years. Ms. Baker’s past experience with him seemed to validate his claims.

“That was shocking to me, because I never saw any kind of behavior or attitude from him that was not in line with Mozilla’s values of inclusiveness,” she said, Recode reported. “But I overestimated that experience.”

------------------------------------------------------------

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/08/photographer-found-to-violate-human.html

"In the United States, the velvet-covered glove on the totalitarian fist will not send one to the gulags or consign the accused to a bullet in the head by one of Beria's henchmen, but you will be ruined financially. Today, if you have any desire to avoid comprising your beliefs or your integrity, you are left with no option but to shut yourself up inside your own home - one that you will not be likely to afford since you will have very few employment options

..................The radical gay agenda appears to be the most vindictive and intolerant movement that this nation has seen in a very long time.

The Left and their radical allies will not brook any offer of dialogue or an attempt to reach a middle ground. No, what they want is everything. In this case, they demand the legal allowance (euphemistically called a "right" as if rights have their origin with governing bodies) for an institution that predates governments themselves and legal prohibitions of opting to refrain from providing a service for something that would effectively make one complicit in the act itself. In work environments, people have already been informed that failing to speak (Read keeping your mouth shut) with someone about their "marriage" as if it is authentic will be perceived as "disapproval"** - itself the new high crime of our era. Soon, churches will be subject to penalties from refusing  to perform these ceremonies and the people will be prohibited from noting that these acts are not only immoral but in fact do not exist despite the exercise of legislative and judicial play-acting.

Even if the person does not contest the legitimacy of the ceremony but just wants to refrain from being a part of the act, he is in trouble.

Don't kid yourself - this and more is on the way."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-mob-shuts-down-bakery-but-are-not.html

"It's the new Kristallnacht - only so far no windows have been broken.

When the Jews of Germany were sufficiently isolated and most people were too afraid to speak in protest, gangs were turned loose on the businesses owned by these loyal citizens. 

Store windows were smashed in wholesale manner , Jews were harassed and beaten, and several thousand of them disappeared outright.. "The Night of Shattered Glass" prefigured the state of things to come for this minority.

When the State and society affirm and give their silent approval to hate, this is what happens.

The mob has been sent to ruin the business that the owners have worked so hard to build. If you do not acquiesce to the New Order, not only will your business be targeted for destruction, but so will anyone who does business with you. You will be financially ruined. This will be the pattern to be followed for all similar situations in the future.

As our contributor Scipio noted, if these measures to force people to abandon their principles and dignity do not work (And maybe even if they do), massive acts of vandalism will follow - and the police will likely do little or nothing is response. Those who stand for something in which they believe are the only truly bad people, and political leaders will pressure the cops to back off.

To make things worse, the regular, average citizen has been cowed into joining in with the massive boycott. [Including canceling previously-made cake orders] Weak and cowardly people have allowed themselves to be so intimidated by the possibility of being called homophobic that they too have stopped buying products from this store. I find more far more fault with these people than with the haters themselves - the latter can only succeed when everyone else is afraid to stand up for what is right.
Men used to be the protectors of society and culture. Now their honor is measured by how much they support the wholesale degradation of women in the abortion clinic and by their support for defiling the institution of marriage.

Women used to be the glue that held society together; no sane man would fail to be chastened by a woman's admonition. Now women have become the instruments of societal destruction. Today they use their ability to influence men to force their husbands to assist with the tearing down of society.

-and while we do all of this, we pat ourselves on the back for a job well done.

The Crime of our era is the failure to be complicit in the degradation of marriage
The Sin of our era is the refusal to mock God's work.

As noted [in previous posts] if vendors refuse to sell to gays simply due to the customer's sexual practices, then they clearly would be in violation of the law. What Washington State wants is to expand the scope of laws protecting people from discrimination to force anyone who operates a business to engage in actions that may be completely contrary to one's principles.

Nazism is not illegal in the US. If a member of a neo-Nazi Party walks into a store owned by a Jewish person, or anyone else for that matter, and orders a product or service custom-made for Hitler's birthday, then the vendor should certainly be within his rights to refuse to fill that order. A vendor cannot refuse service simply because of someones affiliations, but the law cannot rightly be held to force a vendor to participate in an event for that organization."

Want something less severe? OK, how about a vendor that refuses to make t-shirts sponsoring a Harbor Seal hunt? The vendor would not be able to refuse to make t-shirts with other messages/logos for a customer solely due to his grisly occupation, but the law again cannot be used to force someone to take actions that would effectively make one complicit in the smashing of little seal heads. [I hunt deer, and a vendor could not refuse my business due to my method of spending some of my spare time, but that same t-shirt vendor may well tell me that he will make no shirts for a hunting and fishing exposition and have done nothing wrong.]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2014/01/oregon-bakers-found-guilty-for-act-of.html

The radicals have taken control of much of our nation. Failing to engage in a conversation about a coworker's gay marriage, or politely declining to perform a service for a gay wedding (or anniversary) is now cause for closing up shop or giving up your job. In the USSR, you were sent to the gulag. In the US, you won't go to jail but you will be financially ruined. 

The act of providing a service for any event requires a degree of cooperation with that event. I am a Catholic, and as such one cannot discriminate against me. Unlike Catholics, Orthodox, and Mainline Protestants, Evangelical Christians do not allow for the baptism of infants. If I desired a cake or other service for the baptism party for my newborn, and the Evangelical vendor felt that filling that order would violate his beliefs, I would not have the gall to make a complaint. 

This is, however, an society that is truly Orwellian at both the governmental level and - even more frighteningly, at the grass-roots level. A dissident in the Soviet Union or East Germany could at least have a small circle of friends around whom he could make known the fact that he was not happy with the current state of affairs, even if this meant simply keeping conspicuously quiet. In our society, you have more to fear from a complaint or retaliatory vandalism from an angry gay radical than you do from the cops. 

Even attending a party is problematic.The person of conscience has to remain fearful that the wrong topic will come up in conversation - one that will at some point be directed at him for a required response. Forget saying anything that  is not approved by the radicals; the very act of politely noting that you prefer not to comment will likely bring a pack of jackals around you As the angry accusations are leveled at you and the fingers are being pointed close to your face, the desire to refrain from ruining the event for everyone will act as a braking mechanism to what you may want to say to defend yourself (and you are not defending your position, but your own beliefs - who you are), but the radicals will only be emboldened by your sense of decorum. In the end, you may well decide to avoid such gatherings to avoid finding yourself in similar situations. I once faced vicious verbal attacks simply because I declined to provide input on the sickening phenomena of the growing of human embryos to make life easier for those of us who were fortunate enough not to have been grown for the gruesome purpose of harvesting. 

Again, I see no viable option other than to effect a political  break of my beloved republic. There are two utterly different types of people in the United States, and one will not allow any amount of compromise. They want nothing less than your complete Islamic-like submission to their way of doing things.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2014/02/az-religious-conscience-bill-derided-as.html

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2013/08/gay-marriage-supporters-launch-hate.html

Allen West Interview

I like Allen West. He is a brilliant and straight-talking man as well as a patriot.

The only point on which which I disagreed with him was his (many others have the same position as he) was his call to sell energy to Europe to help them break free of Putin's choke-hold of Natural Gas. I tend to hold that we should manage our energy resources carefully, with a view to bringing the US to full independence from OPEC. While we operate with little or no petrodollars finding their ways into the accounts of the bad guys, our geniuses will be edging us ever closer to controlled fusion and other ways to create electricity, hydrocarbons, and non-corn or other food-derived ethanol.

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2014/04/03/why-does-allen-west-wish-that-more-top-generals-would-resign-from-the-military/

"Former Congressman and retired Lieutenant Army Colonel Allen West has a new book out titled “Guardian of the Republic: An American Ronin’s Journey to Faith, Family and Freedom.”

Yesterday Blaze Books spoke with Rep. West about his new book, and a wide variety of issues ranging from the military, a message he hopes the military sends to civilian leaders and Russia, to education and Common Core, to how the congressman believes Republicans can go about garnering support in the black community, the potential for a third major political party and much more..............

Give your elevator pitch for why Blaze readers should pick up “Guardian of the Republic.”

West: Well I think it defines me and it also defines why I fight so passionately for this country. Which I think all Blaze readers really believe passionately in this country. So I think it’s so important right now when you see the American people really not fundamentally understanding what America is about and its established principles and values, that’s what I try to do in this book and it really is not an autobiography, it’s a philosophical biography............

Why are fewer military folks seeking public office at least at the national level?

West: We don’t want to deal with the BS. I mean we’re very straightforward, we’re mission-oriented, we’re task-oriented, and we just don’t have time for charlatans, usurpers and jokers or pranksters. But what you are finding is that there is a clarion call out there to get more to take off their uniform, put on a suit and tie and run, because as someone told me “the oath of office that you took does not have a statute of limitations.”


"..........And to that end, if our civilian leaders have this politically correct ideology as you call it in the book, and fundamentally don’t understand who we’re dealing with, are there folks in the military who see the world as it is who will keep our civilian leaders in check when they pursue misguided policies based on such an ideology?

I wish more of the top level generals would resign, because a message would be sent.
[My note - One recalls the line in the movie Gladiator "A soldier has the advantage of being able to look his enemy in the eye, Senator."]

West: Yea but see the problem is they can’t, because we have a military that’s subservient to civilian leadership. So you know when you have the president who comes out and says, “I hereby declare the edict that turbans, hijabs and beards are going to be allowed in the United States military,” all the general can do is salute the flag and say “Roger that sir.” Or the general can resign. And I wish more of the top level generals would resign, because a message would be sent. And then say, “I’m against these policies because these policies are detrimental to the United States military.” Case in point: Major Nidal Hasan – everyone knew what he was doing – everyone knew the proselytization that he was committing, and the way he was treating some of the patients up there at Walter Reed [Army Medical Center]. He should have never been transferred to Fort Hood. He should have been drummed out of the military. But there were individuals who tried to bring that up. And guess what happened? They were told to “hush.” And the next thing you know thirteen Americans had lost their lives, thirty-some-odd were wounded and we have an administration that declares it as “workplace violence.” So that’s very frustrating. And so yes you want men and women in uniform to be able to speak out but they can’t, because you don’t want to have that type of – that’s outside the lines. I don’t think the American people want a military that will go out and you know run rogue like [General Douglas] MacArthur did with [President] Truman in Korea, and Truman sacked him. But I do think that we need to have those of us who have been in the military that are now on this side like General [Jerry] Boykin is an incredible spokesman on these issues. And I’m right there with him on CAIR’s hate list at number five…I told him I want to get past him and get to number one...........

Shifting gears – you speak to education and the fact that kids don’t know Jean-Jacques Rousseau from Locke from Hobbes."

[My note - Rousseau may be the only  18th century political writer that the Left likes. While he did write of the "just consent of the governed", Rousseau set the stage for Communism by putting great emphasis on the state changing the People to create his "New Man" - the insect-like member of a controlled society who gives up his natural  individual rights to be directed to act as the leadership sees fit for him and everyone else]

"West: Most adults don’t…And when I look at education, we’ve got to make education relevant. That’s why I’m so against this Common Core thing. It’s a horrible thing that the federal government believes they can dictate standards of education all across the entire country. You know kids learn differently. And we need to be able to tap into that. Now, what we do need to stress is an understanding of how this country came to be, and its fundamental values. And we do need to teach how we got to this point – the Declaration, the Federalist Papers, the Constitution. So that when someone comes along and starts saying “hope and change,” someone says well “hope for what and change to what?” When someone comes along and says, “We’re gonna fundamentally transform the United States of America,” someone can say “Transform it for what?” It’s a Constitutional Republic, what do you want to make it? And that’s the key aspect of education. And we have to use the culture to be able to do that because the Left is very good in dominating the culture and saying that the way we are, the way we think, that’s cool. These other guys over there are not cool. Well I think being a conservative is about the coolest thing there is – to grow up and be confident of who you are, understand your country, and to go out and be a productive member of your society – that’s really cool.

In your book you attribute many problems from poverty to substandard education to the breakdown of the family among black Americans — and Americans more broadly — to the Leftist policies of the Great Society. Explain why you believe the Great Society programs have been so detrimental.

The leftist policies have created a twenty-first century economic plantation
Share:West: Well it’s very simple. The leftist policies have created a twenty-first century economic plantation because they have created a dependency society. They have expanded the welfare or nanny state. They’re not interested in the individual. Their indomitable will, their spirit, their entrepreneurial desires. They’re interested in the collective, you know bringing everyone together, the whole groupthink. And that’s how they operate. They pit groups against each other. And we have to get away from that because the power and the strength of America is in each and every individual. So that’s what I would talk to, and you know the ones who want to try to castigate you negatively, attack, I was in the military twenty-two years, almost shot at, blown up, and everything. Their attacks don’t bother me. And I think one of the frustrating things for the Left was that here I am a first term U.S. congressman, I’m the number one target for the Democrat party. George Soros throws in $5 million. They really believe, “Ok we cheat, we do everything possible to get rid of West, get him out of Congress and he’ll go away.” They don’t understand my passion for this country. I don’t need to be on Capitol Hill to stand up and advocate for what is right for this country. And that’s what we want to try to get people to understand. If you are right, if you are principled, you continue to march on. And that frustrates the other side. And I think that’s why I’m in a great position.

Do you think a conservative message can be viable and bring in support from folks in and outside of minority communities who typically have not been receptive to policies and principles promulgated by Republicans?

West: You know when you talk to people in the black community about principles not party, they’ll agree with you. On Sunday the most conservative people in the United States of America are black, in Church. And Church, you’re talking about individual salvation. Well guess what, individual freedom, liberty, I mean that’s what we’re talking about. My parents raised me very conservatively, and that’s what we talk about in the book. So, black conservatism is not something new. It’s been around a long time. Booker T. Washington talked about education, entrepreneurship and self-reliance. So if we go back and we talk about those things, not about party, not, “Sign up to join the Republican…put an elephant on your chest,” but we talk about, “What do you believe? Don’t you believe in a better education for your kids?” We’re not telling people that Barack Obama cancelled the D.C. school voucher program in April of 2009. Look at what’s happening here in New York City with Bill de Blasio with the charter schools. And black parents — single black mothers – you know screaming, outrage. Then where is our side coming in and saying, “This is what we believe in.”...........

Given the growth of bureaucracies ranging from the “alphabet soup” of agencies stemming from the New Deal to the Great Society, to today’s NSA and EPA that govern or at least monitor every aspect of our lives (and incidentally you bring up the parallel of this Leviathan to Marx’s 10 planks of Communism in your book), what can or should the few people who get into Washington actually do to stop the growth of the state and then turn it back?

West: They’ve got to cut off the purse strings to the bureaucratic state. They have to once again understand as Montesquieu wrote in “The Spirit of the Laws” that we have separation of powers. And I think right now you see the legislative branch that is really abdicating a lot of their power over to the executive branch. They’ve got to get the executive branch back under control because Washington, D.C. is going out of control, and you’re right, the bureaucratic state…when the EPA or anyone can just willy-nilly come up with regulations that they’re not going through Congress and they’re causing a financial impact to everyday Americans, and they don’t even know that it’s happening. The next thing you know, here’s a new regulation I have to contend with. So we have got to start getting the legislative branch back into control and cut back down on that expansive growth of the executive branch of the bureaucratic state.

We talk a lot about the growth of the state and the power it might usurp and abuse in the most extreme scenarios. Could you ever envision a time where the military or forces under control that are extra-military would ever turn its guns on U.S. citizens?
West: No. The United States military would never do that. I’ve got plenty of friends that are there and relatives…that’s not gonna happen. The United States military serves this country, and the interesting thing about the United States military is that they take an oath to the Constitution. They don’t take an oath to a king, to a president, to whatever. They do say to obey the orders of the officers appointed above me, but also but also if you are given an immoral order, you don’t have to follow that order. So that’s the beauty of our military, and that’s not gonna happen. And I think that’s also why you see such an animosity between the Left and our military. And that’s why they want to break down the military because that’s really the last bastion of American principle and value, and moral value. You know the president for him, his vital national interest is repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” getting social egalitarianism – getting women in the Rangers and the Navy SEALs. He wants to break the military down from what it is, so no, that would never happen.

If you were to characterize America and where we stand today, where are we in history and what country do we represent?West: Well you do see many similarities to the beginning of the collapse and fall of Rome. You see the corruption of the Senate. You see the devaluing of the currency. You see Roman citizenship did not mean anything – anyone could be a citizen and that’s what we’re talking about now. You know just give amnesty, let everyone come here and be a citizen..........

And so if we’re going to extend that parallel, do we have a Churchill that is going to arise, and more importantly do we have an electorate that will support a Churchill arising?

West: Well it’s interesting that you bring up Churchill because he said you can always count upon America to do what is right after they’ve exhausted all other means. I think there will be an event that will jar the American people…[But] it’s sad that we have to have something bad happen to make us react. That’s not how it should be. We need to have a steady-state because right now we have a pendulum system of governance – it swings one way and we say, “Ah, we don’t like this” – and then the pendulum swings back the other way. I do believe that a principled leader will rise from amongst the people. There are Establishments on both sides, Democrat and Republican, but the American people are gonna get tired of that. The American people don’t like to be told who their leader will be, the American people like to bring forth a leader that is from amongst them. And I believe that that is gonna happen. And I think that depending on what happens the next two election cycles it is very ripe for a third party to arise.

And you don’t think that – or perhaps you do think that the Left will try to use that third party to destroy the Right? You think that party could be politically viable?

West: Yes. I do because there are disaffected Democrats called “conservative Democrats,” “blue-dog Democrats,” and they’re disaffected because the Democrat Party really has gone progressive socialist, very far Left, George Soros runs the Democratic party. So if there’s a leader that can come up and talk principally to the American people, I mean he can galvanize this country, but you just have so many mealy-mouthed folks that say, “You can’t say this, you can’t say that.” Just speak the truth to the people. That’s what they want. They want someone who they can believe in, and that’s kind of what Ronald Reagan did. And he was pretty forthright in his vision for this great nation. And that’s what they’re looking for............................

What was the biggest lesson you took away from your time in the House?

West: My biggest lesson was that we have got to get people that are considering the American interest or the interests of the people. There is just too much special interest influence there, and you know the American people can’t show up and be the lobbyists. But we should have people that are going in – that’s why I talk about servant leadership – and you know when you think about it that’s what Jesus was. And that’s why that faith-heritage portion is so important. We’ve got to restore that, we’ve got to restore people that are willing to go to Washington, D.C., and they’re not afraid of losing. They’re gonna go there and do what is right. If they lose that’s fine, but if they can look in the mirror and say I never lied to you, I never did anything or sacrificed my principles, and that’s the most important part. So that’s what I learned is that we’ve got to get more people up there that want to be servants."

Mom Delays Cancer Treatment to Save Her Baby

This is a story that stands in utter opposition to the current cultural climate.

We are told that ending the lives of our children is no big deal. If a pregnancy causes one to put off college or take a job that was not on one's wish-list, the life that did not ask to be created is not supposed to stand in the way; it should be dealt with as quickly and coldly as possible so that we can have the temporal benefits that we desire.

When my then-wife and I found that we were expected our first child, neither of us yet had what could be referred to as a career. When her pregnancy came up in conversation at work, an old hyper-liberal supervisor told her that she "may not be ready for this baby". The hag went on to tell her that diapers were expensive. This was offered as help.

Fortunately, the demonic advice was not taken. My daughter was born to two parents who knew that they would have to work hard. Three weeks later, I was notified that I had been hired by the local law enforcement agency for which I had applied almost a year before. The starting salary was not much, but the contract had automatic yearly pay increases, and I was young enough to work far more hours than I would want to now. We would be fine.

Not that we even considered an abortion, but can you imagine the guilt that we would have felt if, two days after the due date (the baby was three week early), I had obtained a career position?

This story, however, is one of true sacrifice - one of pure love and one that will draw the ire of rabid feminists. Unlike the "it's my body" mantra of the pro-abortion crowd that turns the "this is my body, which is given up for you" words of Jesus upside down, this Mom sacrificed her life for her child.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/04/02/mother-dies-after-incredibly-selfless-act-to-protect-the-life-of-her-unborn-baby/

"A New York woman died last month after making the ultimate sacrifice for her unborn baby girl — delaying cancer treatment and forging on with her pregnancy.

Elizabeth Joice was first diagnosed with a malignant tumor in 2010, though she was declared cancer-free after undergoing surgery and four rounds of chemotherapy.

After clearing that barrier, she and her husband, Max, wanted to start a family, but doctors told her it would be virtually impossible to conceive.

But Joice was a fighter.

Defying the odds yet again, she and her husband announced that they were pregnant in the summer of 2013, offering up unexpected joy to their friends and family.

And that’s when Joice found out just one month later that her cancer had returned.

She and Max were faced with a horrific choice: Abort the child and begin treatment immediately, start treatment and continue the pregnancy — or delay much-needed medical care in an effort to protect the unborn baby girl.

Joice ultimately decided to delay treatment.

“Having a kid was one of the most important things in the world to her,” Max told the New York Post. “She said, ‘If we terminate the pregnancy and it turns out I can’t have a baby [later], I’ll be devastated.’ She knew this might be her only chance.”...............

Though she was due in March, doctors delivered baby Lily in January via cesarian section so that Joice could begin treatment as soon as possible. But it was too late. The cancer spread and Joice’s health declined."............
Joice died March 9, with her husband by her side.

An online fundraiser organized by friends and family is looking to raise $50,000 to support Max and Lily. As of Tuesday morning, more than $27,000 had already been raised."

The link has a video montage of family photos.

Left Conflates Freight and Passenger Trains

There is a lot to digest as far as the messages that they want us to accept.

Note that the Washington Post, unlike the Washington Times, is a hyper-Left paper.

In the first article, you'll see that firstly a strong case is made for moving much of our freight by rail rather than semi-trailers (often called tractor-trailers in the US). This of course is not new revelation - the energy required to transport an equal amount of freight in a truck is far greater than on a train.

Following this, we find the bait-and-switch; the reader is then edged into the not-so-shrouded message. We are told that new and better ways of doing things are easier to accomplish with governmental coordination with the rail industry because there are bigger (and far fewer) rail companies than there are trucking outfits. To add to that point, the reader is reminded of the apparently anarchic existence of thousands of owner-operators who may own only one or two trucks. The message is clear - lots of small companies are bad and few, but much larger, businesses are good.

The blaster comes at the end. The Conservative columnist George Will, who rightfully exposed the Left's fixation with moving people via trains rather than the evil personally-owned car (these are only for the ones who can pay exorbitant carbon credits), is labeled as "wrong". What the writer of the Post did, though, was get the reader thinking along the lines of moving freight in the hopes that he will conflate materiel with people. We are expected to accept that there is no appreciable difference with moving coal, TV's, or lumber than there is with human beings.

The Left's plan with promoting (with massive amounts of borrowed money) is to set up passenger corridors (only hinted at even by George Will) so that Americans can eventually be herded into cities and other densely-populated regions. The family car - the prime example of the Leftist-derided Consumer Society, is in the crosshairs of the Socialists. They want the regular people to acquiesce to lives of very limited mobility, (see links on Agenda 21* at the bottom of this post) and where they can be under full control.  Imagine the day when most of us can only travel by rail - a system that will be staffed by TSA agents demanding ID's and giving us rubdowns euphemistically referred to as patdowns.

-Your papers, please.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/lets-make-an-effort-to-move-more-freight-by-rail-and-less-by-road-trains-are-more-efficient/2014/03/03/d1947278-9d90-11e3-9ba6-800d1192d08b_story.html

"Last month, President Obama announced an initiative to improve the fuel efficiency of trucks. That’s a lofty goal, but here’s an even better idea: Let’s make an effort to move more freight by rail and less by road. Trains are far more energy-efficient than trucks — and they always will be.

Trains have a significant friction advantage over trucks. The degree of “stickiness” between two surfaces is expressed mathematically as the coefficient of friction. For a steel wheel rolling over a steel rail, its value is approximately 0.001. For a rubber tire rolling over pavement, the coefficient is between 0.006 and 0.010, or roughly an order of magnitude greater. Some friction is good — it stops the vehicle when a person runs out in front of it. But too much friction means less energy driving the vehicle forward..............

Industry consolidation also speeds implementation of new technologies. There are dozens of large trucking companies in the United States, in addition to thousands of independent truckers, which makes it difficult to broadly implement good ideas quickly. (That’s one reason President Obama is getting involved.) By contrast, a small number of companies dominate American rail freight, giving them the power and motivation to improve efficiency...........
Columnist George Will once called the preoccupation with trains a “disorder” that “illuminates the progressive mind.” He’s wrong. Recognizing a 30-year trend, accepting simple physics and caring for the environment isn’t a sickness — it’s a cure.

George Will's piece:

http://www.newsweek.com/will-why-liberals-love-trains-68597

"Generations hence, when the river of time has worn this presidency’s importance to a small, smooth pebble in the stream of history, people will still marvel that its defining trait was a mania for high-speed rail projects. This disorder illuminates the progressive mind.

Remarkably widespread derision has greeted the Obama administration’s damn-the-arithmetic-full-speed-ahead proposal to spend $53 billion more (after the $8 billion in stimulus money and $2.4 billion in enticements to 23 states) in the next six years pursuant to the president’s loopy goal of giving “80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail.” “Access” and “high-speed” to be defined later.....................................

So why is America’s “win the future” administration so fixated on railroads, a technology that was the future two centuries ago? Because progressivism’s aim is the modification of (other people’s) behavior.

Forever seeking Archimedean levers for prying the world in directions they prefer, progressives say they embrace high-speed rail for many reasons—to improve the climate, increase competitiveness, enhance national security, reduce congestion, and rationalize land use. The length of the list of reasons, and the flimsiness of each, points to this conclusion: the real reason for progressives’ passion for trains is their goal of diminishing Americans’ individualism in order to make them more amenable to collectivism.

To progressives, the best thing about railroads is that people riding them are not in automobiles, which are subversive of the deference on which progressivism depends. Automobiles go hither and yon, wherever and whenever the driver desires, without timetables. Automobiles encourage people to think they—unsupervised, untutored, and unscripted—are masters of their fates. The automobile encourages people in delusions of adequacy, which make them resistant to government by experts who know what choices people should make.

Time was, the progressive cry was “Workers of the world unite!” or “Power to the people!” Now it is less resonant: “All aboard!”

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/02/obamas-rural-council-and-un-agenda-21.html

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/03/agenda-21-iclei-creation-and-purpose.html

*http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/04/agenda-21-in-california.html

http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/04/agenda-21-video-democrats-against.html

*http://thehotgates480bc.blogspot.com/2012/04/california-exodus-agenda-21-in-action.html