Google Custom Search

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Nall Gets Good Press in Alabama, Sets Record Straight

Alabama Libertarian Loretta Nall's campaign for Governor got a major boost in the state today with a story that appeared in the Tuscaloosa Times. The Times covered Nall's campaign appearance and speech at the University of Alabama on Friday.

This good news. It's about time the candidate got a fair shake in the Alabama Press.

The reprinted story can be found on Nall's website at:

In addition, Nall sets the record straight concerning the news stories popping up around the country that tend to focus on her looks rather than her platform. She details the negative remarks of a columnist in Alabama and her turning the negative into a positive. In fact, Nall's entire campaign has been largely positive, avoiding the mud slinging and character assassination that is so common with political campaigns these days.

Nall also reports that she will be a guest on NBC's Today show in the near future.

Once again, you can find this and other updated information on Nall's website.

MUSIC! Ernie Haas and Signature Sound

The Gospel Music Association in Nashville, Tennessee selects artists from various sectors of Christian music to receive their 'Dove Awards.' One of the artists nominated this year for the 'new artist of the year' award is a group called 'Ernie Haas and Signature Sound.'

This group has the distinction of achieving gold and platinum status on Billboard Magazine's top-sellers list for their DVDs and CDs...a benchmark that very few Christian artists attain. The group's summer tour this year drew sell-out crowds in a majority of the 21 venues in which it appeared.

Ernie Haas and Signature Sound tours regularly with Gospel Music icon Bill Gaither, appearing on all of Gaither's Homecoming concerts around the world.

When one listens to this energetic group, it is easy to see why audiences are thrilled with their music.

The manager/tenor vocalist of this dynamic quartet is Ernie Haas, who sang with the world-renown Cathedral Quartet from 1990 until 1999 when the group retired. For a brief period of time afterward, Haas traveled as a soloist. Then, in 2001 or so, he joined a friend in forming Signature Sound. It has been only recently, however, that the group gained the attention of a large, national audience when they joined Bill Gaither's family of artists. They record on Gaither's label and are promoted by the Gaither organization.

In taking the group to the top level in Christian music, Haas' goal was to shape a quartet that was fully 21st century, complete with the looks, the style, and the staging that modern audiences have come to expect. A Signature Sound concert will feature super-charged energy, a slick, choreographed stage presentation, fun-filled banter between the group members, and a sound that is tight, balanced, and professional.

The thing that separates this group from other more traditional Gospel Quartets is the dance moves Haas and the other members incorporate into their presentations. This has gained for the group a rather large younger audience, which has brought some new fans into the family of Southern Gospel music. Of course, it doesn't hurt that the members of Signature Sound are young men, most of whom are in their 20s and early 30s. Haas is the oldest in the group, and he is under 40.

An interesting note of interest is that many of the fans of this group may not even know that Signature Sound is a Southern Gospel Quartet, adhering to a basic tradition of four-part male harmony that was born, bred, and perfected in the South. They do not look and act like a traditional male quartet. Their arrangements are thoroughly modern. But underlying it all is an adherence to and appreciation for the great quartet tradition that the Southern Gospel Music pioneers created.

It really doesn't matter, though, that many of their young fans know nothing about all of this. All that matters is that they like what they hear and see.

And that goes for many of the older generation as well!


France is still ablaze with Muslim violence, particularly in the suburbs of Paris, a full year after the story was reported in the American press. As I reported to you last week on The Liberty Sphere, the growing tide of violence at the hands of Muslim extremists in Europe may not be getting much attention in news outlets in the U.S. at present, but it is of great concern to European leaders.

Since the beginning of 2006, over 2,500 police officers have been injured in France alone. When the violence first erupted last year, Islamic Jihadists would usually confront police in small groups of two or three. Their main provocation was setting vehicles on fire along the streets. Today, when police respond to emergency calls, they are confronted by entire tower blocks of Muslim youths emptying into the streets. Within minutes hundreds of Muslims storm police vehicles, throwing rocks and firebombs.

According to the World Tribune, France's huge and growing Muslim community has come under the influence of Al Qaeda operatives who pour money, ammunition, and equipment into these neighborhoods. Their tactic now is to place bogus emergency calls to police and then ambush the officers when they arrive on the scene.

These Muslim neighborhoods have become self-contained entities where police and other emergency personnel are afraid to go.

The French Interior Ministry is aware of the problem, but police officials say the problem is much worse than Paris is willing to acknowledge. Michel Thoomis, the head of the police union, is quoted in the Tribune as saying, 'We are in a state of civil war, orchestrated by Islamic extremists. This is not a question of urban violence any more. It is an intifada, with stones and firebombs.'

The police union is demanding that the Interior Ministry provide them with armored vehicles--a request that so far has been ignored.

Although the growing Muslim mayhem has been under-reported in the press around the world, European leaders privately are worried that what is happening in France could be a model for other European countries, most notably Great Britain and the Netherlands.

The so-called 'under-reporting' of the news of these Islamic attacks actually constitutes a news blackout of sorts, arising from the political correctness that has so thoroughly inflicted western Europe. The result is a swelling torrent of Muslim violence, fanned by Al Qaeda, that has brought France to the brink of civil war.

No amount of cover-up, denial, or wishful thinking will make the problem go away. This demon must be confronted head-on while there is still time.

LATE BREAKING UPDATE!! In what local media describe as the work of 'a group of youths,' Amsterdam was hit Friday evening with an explosion of a bus. The explosive was made by combining common ingredients found in stores and pharmacies across the city. Pharmacy workers reported an unusual amount of these ingredients being sold to 'youths' prior to the attack.

As I have reported to you, the Netherlands is another target of Islamic Jihadists that have infiltrated Europe. In fact, Muslims have immigrated to the Netherlands over the past few years at a pace that exceeds that of France.

In light of what is happening in France, the question becomes, does this attack indicate that Amsterdam is next?

You may want to visit the following website for an eye-opening read--

The Atlas Shrugs blog is an excellent source of information on the global Islamic Jihad that you won't find in the Press!

Senate Hopeful James Webb Starts to Crash and Burn

The Virginia Senatorial campaign of James Webb took a beating today, not from his opponent, Senator George Allen (R-Va.), but from the mouth of Webb himself. This could well spell disaster for the Webb campaign.

But first, a bit of background information.

The race for the Senate in Virginia has been particularly nasty. Webb, seeking to unseat George Allen, went negative early on, accusing the Senator of various and sundry offenses, more often than not centering on Allen's character. This has resulted in Allen's fight for his political life, with each candidate trading barbs that only get more intense as time passes. The unsubstantiated charge that prompted Allen's latest offensive was when Webb claimed that Allen 'used a racial slur' some years ago while a college student.

Not surprisingly, the mainstream media took the story and ran with it, although there was no legitimate way of proving or disproving the allegation.

That lead to the present scuffle over the novels written by James Webb, which include graphic descriptions of the atrocities of war, specifically the War in Viet Nam, of which Webb is a veteran. One scene in particular describes an act of incest between a father and his four-year-old son. The two have oral sex.

Senator Allen claims that such descriptions come from a man who obviously has character issues of his own. That may or may not be true, depending on the internal motivation of the author to write about such things in a series of books that do not claim to be documentaries but NOVELS. After all, Webb may well be merely attempting to portray a scene he actually witnessed as a soldier, calling attention not only to the atrocities of war but to the horrific manner in which women and children are treated in different cultures, in this case, Viet Nam.

However, during a radio interview this morning on Washington Post Radio, Webb may well have inadvertently confirmed Allen's suspicions about his character. As Webb attempted to defend himself against criticism concerning the incestuous scene of oral sex in his novel, he quipped, 'It's not a sexual act.'

The fact that Webb writes about graphic, sexual, and abusive incidents in his novels may not necessarily be a reflection on his character, but the statement, 'It's not a sexual act,' certainly does.

Webb's attempt to claim that incestuous oral sex is not a sexual act is reminiscent of Bill Clinton's assertion that what he did with Monica Lewinski 'was not sexual.' Clinton, in a court of law, went to great lengths to attempt to explain how oral sex is not sex.

James Webb

Not surprisingly, defenders of Webb's statement, some of whom are in the Press, quickly explained that what Webb meant was that in that particular culture, oral sex between a father and his young son is not considered a sexual act, but rather, it is like some sort of rite of passage.

Does this mean, then, that when Islamic cultures conduct the gruesomely brutal act of female circumcision they are merely following cultural dictates and that there is no sexism or abuse inherent in such acts?

To a culture in southeast Asia that is rampant with child prostitution, child pornography, and other acts that civilized cultures recognize as barbaric, a thing like oral sex with a four year old may seem to be nothing more than routine. Civilized people know better.

And this is the root of Webb's problem. By stating, 'It's not a sexual act,' when referring to an act of alarming abuse in a country where such things are not only tolerated but encouraged, Webb has placed himself in a terrible predicament.

How is this defense of his book any different than a defense attorney for a rapist claiming, 'But, it wasn't a sexual act'? After all, we know that rapists are not normally driven by any voracious sexual desire but by power, rage, and a disdain for women. Does this mean, then, that their act of rape is any less a rape merely because of the motivation?

Thus, Webb's predicament is that there is no discernible, rational manner for him to explain his way out of this. Many a politician before him has crashed and burned in a campaign for making far less crucial misstatements. This particular statement, however, gives us a slight glimpse into the mindset of the candidate.

My hunch is that Webb has just insured his own defeat.

Friday, October 27, 2006

NEWS UPDATE!! Riley/Masonic Story Hits Alabama Papers

Alabama Governor Bob Riley

This is an important update to an article I wrote just yesterday on the news blackout in Alabama concerning Governor Bob Riley's membership in a Grand Lodge that excludes Blacks.

A fellow blogger, The Widow's Son, reprinted an editorial that appeared today in the Huntsville Times in Huntsville, Alabama, which puts the spotlight on the Governor's membership in a Lodge that has refused to do what Masonic Lodges across the country have done, and that is recognize the black Prince Hall Masons and allow Blacks as members.

You can read this editorial by visiting the Widow Son's blog at

It is gratifying to see at least one newspaper in Alabama finally getting around to publishing a story that has appeared at least twice in the national press.

O'Reilly on Oprah Brings Out the Nutcases

Fox News commentator and TV host Bill O'Reilly appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show today. I will not comment on every aspect of the show or of O'Reilly's commentary, as his views are well-known. There was nothing in today's appearance that changed, other than the fact that O'Reilly came face-to-face, on national television, with more than a few of Oprah's audience who apparently feel that America is Public Enemy Number One in the War on Terror.

All of us have known all along that the U.S. is home to an element of extremist leftwing ideologues who, since the Viet Nam War, have made it clear they feel that in all international conflicts America is the bad guy. My opinion is that it goes back much further than that, all the way back to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. Communist sympathizers in America quickly jumped on board the bash-America-first bandwagon, claiming that we were the source of all the world's ills.

Two World Wars and the Great Depression put a damper on that parade for a few decades.

The monster raised its ugly head again after the second war, however, resulting in a gradual tide of anti-American sentiment culminating with the Viet Nam War. Thus, Jane Fonda goes to Hanoi to make nice to the very people who are slaughtering our soldiers and countless South Vietnamese.

These people never really went away. Instead they raised up an entirely new generation of ingrates who are perched and ready to pounce on the U.S. whenever there is a good opportunity.

They found one in the War in Iraq.

One by one on Oprah today they arose to eloquently make the case for America as the scourge of the world. One woman in particular perfectly summarized the leftwing nutcase ideology. O'Reilly asked her, 'So who do you think are the bad guys here? Saddam? The insurgents in Iraq? Us?' She said without flinching, 'The bad guys are in Washington, D.C.'

O'Reilly's reminder that Saddam murdered over 400,000 of his own people did not matter. The fact that he invaded a neighboring country did not matter. The fact that the Iraqi invaders plundered and pillaged a small country, murdering scores of men and raping the woman, did not matter. Even the fact that Islamic terrorists use infants as bomb carriers who blow up groups of people, the infants included, did not matter.

As always, no matter what the circumstances, America is always the culprit.

Frankly, I am getting tired of this display. When news came out just after our liberation of Iraq that Saddam had used giant plastic shredding machines to shred to death human beings--ALIVE--I remember the response of one leftwing ideologue when this was pointed out. He said, merely, 'Bush broke international law by going in.'

Nevermind the countless times Saddam had committed crimes against humanity.

Watching these America-bashing parasites on television today was actually nauseating. Rarely do I react to such things with such intensity, given the fact that I have heard it all many times before. But to see it blatantly displayed on a popular national TV program jolted me into facing the stark reality that this country today is home to an element that wishes for our demise, consciously or unconsciously.

Perhaps this is my denial, and my denial is protecting me from feeling the full impact of these displays, but I believe these people are nutcases who need longterm treatment.

At least I hope this is the explanation for the behavior. If these people are fully sane and in full possession of all their faculties, we are in deep trouble as a nation.

These Chicks Are Made For Clucking

The Dixie Chicks are back in the news, once again the center of controversy on two counts--one being their movie release entitled 'Shut Up and Sing,' which serves as a vehicle for the Chicks to continue to unleash their continual stream of Bush-bashing, and the other being the fact that both NBC and CW Television are refusing to air ads for the movie. The decision by the two networks is based upon the rationale that because of their overt political overtones during an election year, there is no appropriate time-slot to place such ads.

One may well argue that the decision not to run the ads is a violation of free speech. Yet this is precisely the predicament in which organizations such as the NRA find themselves as election day draws near, under the provisions of McCain-Feingold.

The McCain-Feingold Act prevents organizations like the NRA from running ads close to Election Day. The NRA strongly objected to its provisions, claiming that their right to free speech was being violated.

This is precisely the argument of the Chicks concerning their ads. So, why should the Chicks be allowed to run overtly political advertising so close to an election when the NRA cannot?

I strongly suspect that the timing of the release of the movie itself was carefully coordinated with the sizeable Bush-hating element in Hollywood and among film-makers. It is very interesting, indeed, that not only are we treated to the Chicks' movie premier two weeks prior to an election but a well-coordinated scheme to keep the Foley scandal in the news far beyond its significance, as well as the revelation that George Soros, the Democrat billionaire, is meeting on a daily basis with network news brass to bury positive stories about Bush and headline the negative ones.

No doubt the Dixie Chicks are well-talented. For some odd reason, however, they have chosen to emphasize their politics rather than their art. It isn't as if they needed the publicity. Their talent speaks for itself. But their propensity for creating controversy by talking rather than singing has unfortunately resulted in the near demise of their careers. By and large music fans pay their money to hear their favorite artists perform and not to treat them to political lectures. The fans, as it turns out, voted with their pocketbooks, forsaking the latest Chicks' concert tour in droves, causing several venues to cancel and others to move to smaller concert halls.

As a takeoff on the old Nancy Sinatra song, 'These boots are made for walking,' apparently these Chicks are made for clucking. Like three chickens in the barnyard, they cluck, incessantly gibbering about their politics, when all the fans wanted was to hear their enormous talent.

Thursday, October 26, 2006

The Camille Paglia Interview at Salon

One is always in for a treat whenever Camille Paglia speaks. Paglia, one of the founding contributors at, is at once consistently stimulating and entertaining. Never one to mince her words, she unleashes her poignant views on a variety of subjects from the feminists' stake in the success of Condi Rice to Bill Clinton's volcanic eruption on Fox News.

Her most astounding observations, however, are reserved for the Mark Foley scandal and the manner in which it is currently backfiring on THE DEMOCRATS. That's right...the Democrats and not the Republicans.

Paglia presents an interesting point of view on the subject, asserting that the entire story should have been news for two days, tops. Everything after that was overkill. She is particularly miffed at the manner in which Democrats handled the story, entering into an overt collusion with the mainstream media to keep the story at the top of the news for weeks.

As a liberal Democrat, Paglia reserves both her love AND her disdain for the Party.

According to Paglia, the Foley story was a no-win situation for Democrats determined to benefit from the 'October surprise.' The most obvious reason for this is the Democrats' duplicity and opportunism. The Mark Foley story was in the hands of certain Democrat operatives, including a few Congressmen, weeks and perhaps months before the story broke. Determined to create a scandal before there was any concrete proof of wrongdoing, the Democrats colluded with members of the media to break the story just weeks before the November election, demonize Foley as a pedophile although the House Page in question was of legal age, and portray the Republican House leadership as 'harboring and protecting a child molester.'

For weeks we saw Democrat operatives hitting the airwaves with the mantra, 'They were negligent in protecting our precious children who serve in the House,' although the Page in question was no child according to the least not when it comes to consensual sex. He was 17--one year over the legal threshold.

In addition, after all these weeks and a swarm of investigations into the incident, no evidence has been found of any physical contact between Foley and the Page. The only possible thing that could be construed as 'evidence' is the series of emails and Instant Messages, which, according to Democrats of late, is supposed to be 'private.'

Is this not the Party that claims government snooping into the private conversations of Americans is unlawful?

Apparently communication that has even the slightest hint of sexual overtones is fair game for government snoops. Yet conversations between American citizens of questionable reputation and overseas terrorists should be protected by the Constitutional right to privacy.

It is amazing as to how sheer political expediency can produce such blatant displays of hypocrisy.

Paglia maintains that Democrat duplicity and opportunism played right into the hands of rightwing columnists such as Ann Coulter, who quickly pointed out that the Democrats' sudden attack of morality when it comes to Foley is odd given their vehement defense of Gerry Studds and Barney Frank, particularly when Foley was never actually physically involved with the Page, while Studds' lavish affair with a male Page was well-known.

One other point of note is that Paglia maintains that the hype given to the Foley incident makes Democrats and their comrades in the Press responsible for an unintended backlash against gay men. Paglia asserts that the whole mess may well place the very lives of gay men in danger, given the overt attempt to paint Foley as a sex-crazed, boy-hungry predator who preys on 'children.'

As a personal aside, when the story first broke, I was listening to NPR, and I had the distinct impression that somehow Foley had been caught with 8-year-olds. Only later did I discover that the individual in question was 17 years of age.

The unintended consequence of gay-bashing, hate crimes against gays, etc. can be laid squarely at the feet of the Democrat Party and the mainstream news media, which, in their attempt to vilify Foley for political gain only served to reinforce cultural stereotypes of gay men as child predators.

Given that the entire scheme was politically motivated from the start, the Democrats AND the media, deserve all the backlash they get from the general public.

The Pattern of News Blackouts in Alabama

As Libertarian Loretta Nall campaigns for Governor of the state of Alabama, citizens will find plenty of television, radio, and press coverage in various parts of the country, and even around the world. That is, everywhere except for the state of Alabama.

Nall's campaign has received a minimal amount of coverage in the state, with the exception of this week's appearances on local ABC, NBC, and FOX television outlets, all the result of the attention the candidate has received from a major AP story that went out globally. Until this week Nall had been virtually ignored by the major media, which has opted instead to focus on Bob Riley's bid for re-election.

Is there some sort of odd pattern here?

The very same media that has ignored Russ and Dee Fine's termination by Crawford Broadcasting has also largely ignored Nall, at least until the AP forced the issue.

The one common element that the Fines share with the Nall campaign is Bob Riley. The Fines' exposure of Riley's membership in the racist Grand Lodge led to their termination. Nall is running against Riley.

Over the past few days Nall has received support from places such as Toronto, Chicago, Boston, and other major metropolitan areas. She has made headlines in places as far away as the U.K. Yet the state of Alabama is just now catching on?

When the media is a co-conspirator in an orchestrated news blackout, taking its cues from politicians who wield an enormous amount of influence, society suffers. The citizens never get the complete story. This is bad for democracy, and it is bad for the state of Alabama.

The fact that the Governor of a state can wield so much power as to virtually silence any negative commentary should send chills up the spine of any conscientious citizen. If this sort of travesty can happen to Russ and Dee Fine, we should all shutter to think what a powerful political machine can do to those who are not in the public spotlight.

Loretta Nall's own personal story about her chilling encounter with law enforcement agents who descended upon her home in 2002 is a perfect case in point.

It is gratifying to see Nall getting the news coverage she has been sorely needing all along in this campaign. But that coverage has come with less than 2 weeks to go in the campaign. How convenient. While I'm certain that for Nall it's better late than never, too bad that there is no last minute media push on behalf of Russ and Dee. The local media didn't even cover a Masonic protest against racism held outside the Grand Lodge in Birmingham--a protest that was inspired by the Fines.

I have these questions. Is there a real news organization in Alabama, or is the media simply a 'polit-bureau'--the voice of propaganda of the state? What or WHO is the ultimate source of these news blackouts?

These questions demand answers.

UPDATE!! Russ and Dee Fine Tell Their Story

Alabama radio personalities Russ and Dee Fine, who were fired while still on the air from Crawford Broadcasting's 101.1 FM, 'the Source,' finally tell their story on their website at This is the latest information from the popular husband-and-wife team, posted just yesterday.

As we have reported before on The Liberty Sphere, the Fines got the axe not because of low ratings, low ad revenue, or lack of popularity, but because they dared to stand up to the Riley Machine in the state of Alabama, exposing the Governor's membership in a racist order of the Freemasons.

Most Masonic orders in this nation and around the world have very clear standards against exclusion on the basis of race. Not in Alabama. The Grand Lodge of Alabama still practices racial discrimination, which is their right as a private entity, but is it proper for a sitting governor to be a member of such an organization?

This was Russ and Dee's only faux raise this question. The Riley Machine, along with the powerful Grand Lodge came after them with a vengeance. The Fines now wonder if they will ever be able to hit the airwaves again. Despite their large following in the state, their right to free speech has been severely hampered, their source of livelihood gone.

The national media has run the story several times. But, as I have mentioned before, there has been a total news blackout on this story in the state of Alabama. Apparently the few news reporters who still have some personal integrity these days have wimped out for the fear of termination by their employers.

This, to say the least, is a sad state of affairs not only for Alabama but for the entire nation.

I encourage you to visit their website and read their moving words. This will be an eye-opener you won't soon forget. Here is the URL--

The Rightful Heirs of the Goldwater Legacy

When Barry Goldwater ran for President against Lyndon Johnson in 1964, little did anyone know that the views espoused by the famed Arizona conservative would form the basis for a major shift in the political landscape in America. Goldwater was trounced by Johnson in the election, the result of which was largely due to the less than honorable campaign ads run by the Johnson camp suggesting that the Senator posed a great risk for nuclear war.

One cannot forget those television ads, showing a child playing in a field as a missile passes over head, resulting in a large mushroom cloud in the distance.

Goldwater, of course, would be the culprit whose actions would elicit such an attack from Communist Russia, if he were elected...or so the ad claimed.

Several outgrowths of that campaign, however, secured for Goldwater a place in history as ‘Mr. Conservative’ who laid the groundwork for the most far-reaching ideological shift since FDR. First, a man by the name of Ronald Reagan delivered an eloquent and stirring endorsement speech of Goldwater, carried nationwide, that would result in Reagan’s rise to national prominence, and later, his ascent to the Presidency. Second, LBJ’s handling of the war in View Nam proved to be his political undoing in less than four years. And third, the tumultuous years of the 60s, the scandals of the 70s, and the concomitant cynicism that developed, all culminated in a national mood that was ripe for change.

The conservative movement capitalized on that mood as Americans increasingly questioned all institutions, having witnessed the failure of big government to solve the problems that social programs were meant to alleviate. Reagan’s tumultuous ascent to the Presidency was years in the making, the philosophical foundation of which was laid by William F. Buckley, the political impetus of which was provided by Goldwater, and the effective and charismatic communication of which was provided by Reagan.

Goldwater’s granddaughter has published a book this year about her grandfather that has created somewhat of a stir in American politics. The book makes a clear distinction between a classical ‘libertarian’ type of conservative and today’s ‘neo-conservatves’ such as former Attorney-Genera John Ashcroft, political pundits such as Charles Krauthaimmer.and, to a great degree, President Bush. Ms. Goldwater has even gone as far to suggest that her grandfather would not be welcomed in the Republican Party today.

The consideration of such a notion has produced all sorts of strange alliances crawling out of the woodwork, such as some Democrats claiming that they are actually closer in ideology to Goldwater than the Republicans. This stems from the fact that Goldwater was wary of righwing religious activists and claimed that the government had no business telling a woman she could not have an abortion.

A deeper look at the ideological foundation of Goldwater’s views reveals a very different motivation for his statements than those who espouse ‘a woman’s right to choose’ today, or those who hop onto every opportunity to malign conservative Christians for their involvement in politics. Goldwater was a true believer in the traditional, conservative/libertarian ideal of limited government. He believed that government should be small, that it’s power should be severely limited, and that it’s ability to intrude into the private lives of Americans should be scaled back to almost nil.

In Goldwater’s mind this principle was far-reaching. Not only did it apply to government keeping its hands out of private enterprise and free commerce, but also to a person’s private life. A small, limited government would not have the power or means to concern itself with moral, religious issues that should be left to private citizens.

What the Democrats who claim to be heirs of the Goldwater ideology fail to realize is that this point of view reached far into EVERY area of government power, including many of the long-revered social programs liberals consider to be sacrosanct. Goldwater voted AGAINST most of the social initiatives of Lyndon Johnson’s ‘Great Society,’ thus prompting Johnson's Vice-Presidential nominee Hubert Humphrey in 1964 to refer to Goldwater as ‘Senator No.’

Goldwater was no friend to expanding government programs doing what he felt should be left to the private sector and to individual citizens themselves. Not only did he oppose the new social initiatives of LBJ but also the tax hikes to fund them. When it came to Viet Nam it wasn’t that Goldwater felt we should ‘cut and run,’ but that the war should be fought to win. He believed that Washington had tied the hands of the troops on the ground.

It is gratifying at this stage in the nation’s life that we should be reexamining the Goldwater legacy. That examination, however, must be thorough, and not simply a precursory skimming of history in order to pick what is conveniently expedient for those with a political ax to grind with the current administration. When the record is examined, the WHOLE record, not only will contrasts be drawn between traditional conservatives and neo-conservatives, but drastic differences will be highlighted between the Goldwater ideology and Democrats.

If the late Senator would not be welcomed by the Republicans of today, then he would surely be burned in effigy by the Democrats.

Goldwater does not belong to them. He belongs to those of us who have long warned against big government, including the sacred cows of those who advocate expanding government’s role in social programs.

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

Libertarian Core Principles

Those persons who espouse a political and social philosophy known as 'libertarianism' largely share an adherence to a set of core principles that form the heart of the movement. One normally thinks of the word 'liberty' when considering the term 'libertarian,' and indeed, the pursuit and the fight for human liberty in every aspect of life forms the basis of the movement, dating back to the Founders of this Republic.

By no means do all libertarians march in lockstep. There is plenty of room for disagreement on various issues. For example, my support for Libertarian Loretta Nall is not based upon a total agreement with her on every issue but a recognition that the candidate is committed to the core principles of liberty, as espoused by the Founding Fathers.

At this important juncture in the last two weeks of the 2006 midterm campaigns I believe it is of vital importance to once again stress those core principles of libertarianism. I first wrote an article on this matter on October 15. In that article I included a definition of libertarianism written by a blogger on Yahoo that I knew only as 'Becky C.' Recently I discovered that Becky C. has a blog on 'Blogspot.' I invite you to visit her website for an informative and delightful consideration of the cause of liberty and other issues at:

Becky C.

Once again, here is Becky C.'s highly informative definition of libertarianism. Please bear in mind these critical and vital principles as you decide for whom to vote.


(1) Individualism. Libertarians see the individual as the basic unit of social analysis. Only individuals make choices and are responsible for their actions. Libertarian thought emphasizes the dignity of each individual, which entails both rights and responsibility. The progressive extension of dignity to more people -- to women, to people of different religions and different races -- is one of the great libertarian triumphs of the Western world.

(2) Individual Rights. Because individuals are moral agents, they have a right to be secure in their life, liberty, and property. These rights are not granted by government or by society; they are inherent in the nature of human beings. It is intuitively right that individuals enjoy the security of such rights; the burden of explanation should lie with those who would take rights away.

(3) Spontaneous Order and the Civil Society. A great degree of order in society is necessary for individuals to survive and flourish. It's easy to assume that order must be imposed by a central authority, the way we impose order on a stamp collection or a football team. The great insight of libertarian social analysis is that order in society arises spontaneously, out of the actions of thousands or millions of individuals who coordinate their actions with those of others in order to achieve their purposes. Over human history, we have gradually opted for more freedom and yet managed to develop a complex society with intricate organization. The most important institutions in human society -- language, law, money, and markets -- all developed spontaneously, without central direction. Civil society -- the complex network of associations and connections among people -- is another example of spontaneous order; the associations within civil society are formed for a purpose, but civil society itself is not an organization and does not have a purpose of its own.

(4) The Rule of Law. Libertarianism is not anarchy or hedonism. It is not a claim that "people can do anything they want to, and nobody else can say anything." Rather, libertarianism proposes a society of liberty under law, in which individuals are free to pursue their own lives so long as they respect the equal rights of others. The rule of law means that individuals are governed by generally applicable and spontaneously developed legal rules, not by arbitrary commands; and that those rules should protect the freedom of individuals to pursue happiness in their own ways, not aim at any particular result or outcome.

(5)Limited Government. To protect rights, individuals form governments. But government is a dangerous institution. Libertarians have a great antipathy to concentrated power, for as Lord Acton said, "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Thus they want to divide and limit power, and that means especially to limit government, generally through a written constitution enumerating and limiting the powers that the people delegate to government. Limited government is the basic political implication of libertarianism, and libertarians point to the historical fact that it was the dispersion of power in Europe -- more than other parts of the world -- that led to individual liberty and sustained economic growth.

(6) Free Markets. To survive and to flourish, individuals need to engage in economic activity. The right to property entails the right to exchange property by mutual agreement. Free markets are the economic system of free individuals, and they are necessary to create wealth. Libertarians believe that people will be both freer and more prosperous if government intervention in people's economic choices is minimized.

(7)The Virtue of Production. Much of the impetus for libertarianism in the seventeenth century was a reaction against monarchs and aristocrats who lived off the productive labor of other people. Libertarians defended the right of people to keep the fruits of their labor. This effort developed into a respect for the dignity of work and production and especially for the growing middle class, who were looked down upon by aristocrats. Libertarians developed a pre-Marxist class analysis that divided society into two basic classes: those who produced wealth and those who took it by force from others. Thomas Paine, for instance, wrote, "There are two distinct classes of men in the nation, those who pay taxes, and those who receive and live upon the taxes." Similarly, Jefferson wrote in 1824, "We have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." Modern libertarians defend the right of productive people to keep what they earn, against a new class of politicians and bureaucrats who would seize their earnings to transfer them to nonproducers.

(8) Natural Harmony of Interests. Libertarians believe that there is a natural harmony of interests among peaceful, productive people in a just society. One person's individual plans -- which may involve getting a job, starting a business, buying a house, and so on -- may conflict with the plans of others, so the market makes many of us change our plans. But we all prosper from the operation of the free market, and there are no necessary conflicts between farmers and merchants, manufacturers and importers. Only when government begins to hand out rewards on the basis of political pressure do we find ourselves involved in group conflict, pushed to organize and contend with other groups for a piece of political power.

(9) Peace. Libertarians have always battled the age-old scourge of war. They understood that war brought death and destruction on a grand scale, disrupted family and economic life, and put more power in the hands of the ruling class -- which might explain why the rulers have not always shared the popular sentiment for peace. Free men and women, of course, have often had to defend their own societies against foreign threats; but throughout history, war has usually been the common enemy of peaceful, productive people on all sides of the conflict.

It may be appropriate to acknowledge at this point that it may be your suspicion that libertarianism seems to be just the standard framework of modern thought -- individualism, private property, capitalism, equality under the law. Indeed, after centuries of intellectual, political, and sometimes violent struggle, these core libertarian principles have become the basic structure of modern political thought and of modern government, at least in the West and increasingly in other parts of the world.

However, three additional points need to be made:

First, libertarianism is not just these broad principles. Libertarianism means action and actually applies these principles fully and consistently, far more so than most modern thinkers and certainly more so than any modern government.

Second, while our society remains generally based on equal rights and capitalism, every day new exceptions to those principles are carved out in Washington and in Albany, Sacramento, and Boston (not to mention London, Bonn, Tokyo, and elsewhere). Each new government directive takes a little bit of our freedom, and we should think carefully before giving up any liberty.

Third, society is resilient; it can withstand many burdens and continue to flourish; but it is not infinitely resilient. Those who claim to believe in libertarian principles but advocate more and more confiscation of the wealth created by productive people, more and more restrictions on voluntary interaction, more and more exceptions to property rights and the rule of law, more and more transfer of power from society to state, are unwittingly engaged in the ultimately deadly undermining of civilization.


Tuesday May 23, 2006

Gospel Music's Bill Gaither Tops Billboard Charts

Southern Gospel Music icon Bill Gaither stands alone among artists in the Christian music field. In 2005 he sold more tickets to his concerts around the world than most secular artists, including such stars as Elton John and Rod Stewart. His music videos have reached #1 on Billboard Magazine's best-seller list at least a dozen times, meaning that his sales have consistently reached gold, platinum, and multi-platinum status.

Gaither insists that his whopping success came quite by accident and that he is just doing what he loves to do.

His story would certainly bear that out.

From humble Indiana beginnings, William J. Gaither developed a knack for music-making and songwriting at an early age. He formed a trio in the mid-50s called 'The Bill Gaither Trio,' which had limited success in the early years. He graduated college and began teaching high school English, where he met his future wife, Gloria.

Gloria began singing in the Trio and became a collaborator with Bill in the writing of Gospel songs. One of their first major successes was a song that became a Gospel standard, 'He Touched Me,' which has been recorded by such varied artists as Elvis Pressley and Loretta Lynn. From there the couple went on to write over 600 Gospel songs, many of which became standards that are found in numerous church hymnals across the country today, including, 'Because He Lives,' 'The King is Coming,' and 'It Is Finished.'

Meanwhile, the Bill Gaither Trio was beginning to gain recognition across the country with its unique sound featuring Bill and Gloria, and Bill's brother, Danny Gaither. As Gaither's songs gained popularity, the Trio's popularity began to spread, and by the 1970s they were singing to sold-out audiences across the country.

In the early 1980s Gaither had a brainstorm that was born out of his lifelong love for four-part male harmony. Stating that he always wanted to sing in a male Gospel quartet, he formed 'The Gaither Vocal Band,' which began singing in the Trio's concerts. They were a smashing success, and once again Gaither found himself enjoying brisk sales not only of the Trio's music but of the Vocal Band's as well.

During the 1980s Gaither was instrumental in launching the careers of various artists who went on to become stars in the Gospel field, such as Sandi Patti, Steve Green, and many more.

Then, in the early 1990s Gaither once again stumbled onto a goldmine quite by accident and arising out of his love for the great Southern Gospel groups that had been a large part of his formative years as a boy. He invited some of those Gospel pioneers to his recording studio for an informal get-together, which he wanted videotaped as a keepsake for posterity.

Little did he know that this gathering would become a history-making phenomenon. It turned out that as word got around that this tape existed, there were many people who were just as enamored with these Gospel greats as was Gaither. Gaither began producing the videos and marketing them to retail stores. Sales exploded. Soon people all over the country were watching the videos that contained scenes of such Gospel music legends as Jake Hess and Hovie Lister of the Statesmen Quartet, James Blackwood of the Blackwood Brothers, Eva Mae Lefevre, Glen Payne and George Younce of the Cathedral Quartet, Howard and Vestal Goodman of the Happy Goodman Family, and many more.

Soon more videos followed as the fans demanded more. Gospel icons such as The Florida Boys, the Speers, J.D. Sumner (the famous bass vocalist who is listed in the Guinness Book of World Records as the lowest bass in the world), Dottie Rambo, and many others.

These videos became so popular that stores everywhere had trouble keeping their shelves stocked. Gaither began a national television program based upon the videos called, 'Bill Gaither's Homecoming Friends.' The program boasts a weekly audience of 80 million viewers.

Since 1994 Gaither has taken the Homecoming group on the road, playing to sold out houses all over the world, including Carnegie Hall in New York City and most of the largest music arenas and concert halls in the world.

At the age of 70 Gaither says he has no intention of slowing down. No one can blame him. When one is fortunate enough to do what they love, why quit?

After all, as Gaither says, 'We're having a lot of fun.'

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Terrorism Victims and American Amnesia

Americans are famous for exhibiting what I call a bad case of acute collective amnesia. How quickly we forget events that catapult us to the brink of disaster, only to return to our cozy womb of collective amnesia shortly after the crisis passes.

From a psycho-social point of view, this may be perfectly understandable and easy to explain. The self-protective mechanism of forgetfulness and/or denial is a coping mechanism, a means of survival. The human brain is infinitely capable of relegating traumatic events and their emotional aftermath to the realm of the unconscious, thus allowing us to carry on with life with a minimum amount of disruption.

However, there are some things that are dangerous to forget.

The Holocaust. 7 million Jews and political dissenters murdered.

Joseph Stalin's purge of Russian dissidents which resulted in over 20 million deaths in the first half of the 20th century under Communist rule.

The aftermath of our cutting and running in Viet Nam, which led to a barbaric bloodbath that has rarely been seen in human history, conducted by the Khomere Rouge.

These things must be remembered. The adage is that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.

Americans must maintain the ability to snap out of their amnesia on occasion long enough to remember what happened to us as a nation on September 11, 2001. We were bombarded with the stark reality that terrorism is real and it had come to our shores.

We must also remember who did it and who is part of their worldwide push to destroy Western society and its values. And we must never forget the barbaric deeds done by those who fight in the army of the Islamic Jihadists.

The images below are a reminder. America's collective amnesia must not be allowed to lead us to erase from our memories the lives of those forever marred by the acts of barbarism by extremist Muslims. We must continue to do all within our power to honor their memory by fighting terrorism with all our might, as long as it takes to destroy this world-wide scourge.

The following image is of American Paul Johnson, who went to Iraq to work as a civilian in the attempt to rebuild the country. This photo shows Paul and his wife. Paul was beheaded by Islamic Jihadists in Iraq.

Groups of Islamic thugs await the perfect opportunities to spread carnage all over the world.

When the Pope dared to mention in a lecture before a group of Roman Catholic theologians in Germany that Islam has a history of being a violent religion, here was the reaction of the supposed cool, rational members of the Muslim militants.

Kim-Sun-il was an evangelical Christian kidnapped by Muslim extremists and later beheaded despite his pleas for mercy and the cries for the help of his government.

Another hideous scene of a beheading about to happen.

The Armstrong beheading.

My hope is that these sobering reminders will serve as a wake-up call to Americans who tend to be lured to sleep or to cynicism by opportunistic politicians who apparently suffer from their own form of amnesia.

May we NEVER forget!

NEWS FLASH!! Loretta Nall to Appear on Fox News

Alabama gubernatorial candidate Loretta Nall, who is running on the Libertarian ticket, is set to appear on the Fox News morning program, Fox and Friends, in the morning, Wednesday, Oct. 25, 2006, at 7:50 AM.

Consult the Nall campaign blog for more updates...

Nall Campaign Heats Up, Riley Gets Bad News

Libertarian Loretta Nall's bid for the Governor's mansion in Alabama is heating up today, reaping the benefits of the national spotlight brought to her campaign from yesterday's AP news story. The Alabama native has been all over the airwaves today as Nall has granted interviews to news outlets as diverse as small radio stations in Alabama, to large, metropolitan broadcasters in California and Chicago.

The exposure has brought new interest in the Nall campaign at a very critical time in the race. Today marks the countdown--two weeks left until the November elections. It is to be hoped that the media spotlight will lead to a spark in the interest of voters in Alabama, who are clearly increasingly wary of the two major parties in the state.

It is unfortunate that Nall has received billing as 'the candidate who campaigns on cleavage,' although the candidate graciously maintains that if this initial interest leads to a serious consideration of her views, then she is satisfied.

A serious look at Nall's views is imperative. Contrary to what some writers are saying, Nall is NOT promoting the use of illegal drugs. Some bloggers and news outlets seize upon her involvement in the Marijuana Party as evidence that she is just another dope pushing druggie. This is far from the truth. Nall's platform is one of advocating a change in U.S. Drug Policy, an idea whose time has come with the gross failure of America's 'war on drugs' and the waste of billions of the taxpayers' money. Even William F. Buckley, revered longtime conservative leader, has called for an end to the war on drugs and a legalization policy that will end the crime riddled black market overnight, similar to what happened with the end of Prohibition.

As I have stated many times such a view is worth a try, given the fact that after all these years and billions of dollars wasted on a 'drug war' that clearly did not work, the country can now implement a more reasonable approach of legalization, decriminalizing non-violent drug offenders, and initiating a program of detox and rehab for those held in the grip of addiction. These persons are victims of a serious, life-threatening malady, not criminals who belong in jail.

More on Nall's campaign platform can be found at, and at her blog at

Nall's opponent in this race is Alabama Governor Bob Riley, who is running for a 2nd term. Riley has taken another hit in the news of late with a story in the AP about the Cato Institute's rating for U.S. Governors. The Cato Institute is an important libertarian and conservative think-tank. Riley has received a grade of 'F' primarily for his tax policies.

This bad news comes on the heels of another major story in the AP concerning Riley's membership in the racist Grand Lodge of Alabama. You can find several stories about this matter here on The Liberty Sphere.

Polls in Alabama show that Riley leads his closest rival, Lt. Governor Lucy Baxley, 57% to 36%. This is difficult to believe and yet not difficult to understand given the Alabama media's complicity in burying negative stories about Riley. The polls could well be wrong for that reason alone.

With the Nall campaign hitting its stride and the Riley campaign limping from a double-whammy in the national news, this race could well get very interesting in the last two weeks of the campaign.

The Roll Call of the Weak and Incompetent

Who could forget Democrat National Committee Chair Howard Dean going ballistic in a speech to supporters two years ago? Through the years Chairman Dean has inadvertently defined himself as the master of demagoguery, comparing President Bush to Adolph Hilter and the like. Here we see him giving one of his famous gestures, and we thank Internet Weekly for this shot, which contains an interesting, humorous addition in the dialogue box.

In a Democrat-controlled Congress, Howard Dean's power and influence would skyrocket...not exactly the most reassuring prospect.

Next we see this ominous looking character. This is Democrat Harry Reid, who recently has been the subject of an investigation into campaign funds, which brought to light some unethical, and even illegal, activity...none of which has been played up in the national media. Reid says he is going to give the money back to the donors. This is fine news, but one would think that a sincerely ethical person would do the right thing BEFORE he gets his hand caught in the cookie jar.

This is Senator Barbara Boxer of California. She and her fellow Senator from California, Diane Feinstein, are the dynamic duo of the dubious, waging war on law-abiding citizens who own guns. This is only one of many issues the pair have seized upon in order to fulfill their vision of a intrusive yet 'protective' Big Brother. But, we are to remember, 'Big Brother LOVES you!' Sure, Senator Boxer, sure.

This is John Conyers, one of the most extremist of the leftwing element that controls the Democrat party these days. He wants to begin impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush.

And now we come back to Pelosi, who is slated to be the next Speaker of the House if the Democrats win. She thinks national security is not a major issue in this campaign. One wonders where Congresswoman Pelosi has been for the past five years...supposedly serving as House Minority Leader, but obviously her brain has taken leave of her body to travel to realms unknown in outer space.

John Kerry thinks we should return to what he considers to be a successful Clinton administration policy of bi-lateral talks with the North Koreans. But be very very quiet. We don't want the Senator to know that his heroes in the Clinton Administration were used by Kim Jong-il to begin building an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The poor guy might faint if he ever came out of his denial.

And this, of course, is the infamous Diane Feinstein, who serves as Senator for the 'People's Republic of California.' Feinstein, along with Pelosi, are abortion supporters who receive a ZERO rating on issues from the National Right to Life Committee, a ZERO rating on Second Amendment issues from various gun rights organizations, and a ZERO rating on national defense and security from watchdog groups. In a Democrat-controlled Senate, Feinstein would be a major player with her seniority...a good place from which to launch policies that will further rob the citizens of their security, weaken their defense, and further erode the rights of the people to keep and bear arms.

This roll call of the weak and incompetent should be a most reassuring exercise for Americans as they contemplate the possibility of a Democrat-controlled Congress. I am certain we will all be sleeping better at night with these characters at the helm.

Dick Morris Reports Major Shift Among Voters

Dick Morris, former political consultant to Bill Clinton and nationally-known columnist, is reporting a major shift among voter preferences. Within just the last 5 days, according to Morris, Republicans are showing signs of a surge in voter approval.

Many of the races that were once considered breaking in favor of Democrats are now competitive. Some of the more competitive races in the country are exhibiting a break toward the Republican candidates, such as the very close and hotly contested races in Tennessee and Missouri.

Morris says that there are three basic reasons for this dramatic shift.

One, the President is beginning to reap the benefit of his enormously successful 'Bush Doctrine' toward North Korea. With the Chinese providing ample evidence that the concept of 'multi-lateral' talks with North Korea works, Americans are able to draw a clear contrast between the failed policy of bi-lateral talks under the Clinton Administration and the successful policy of multi-lateral talks under Bush. Kim Jong-il has demonstrated that he heeds the warnings of no one but the Chinese government. It is vital that China be a part of any series of talks with Kim.

Second, the President is enjoying a very strong economy. Morris knows the power of good economic figures in a campaign, having been an integral part of the Clinton staff when the mantra of 'it's the economy, stupid,' was a campaign cry. Mr. Bush is enjoying the biggest stock market surge in history. Unemployment is low. Gas prices are way down. This is a prescription for success, given that the Democrats have made Mr. Bush the focal point of their campaign to control Congress. This tactic may well backfire.

Third, Americans may feel that mistakes have been made in the manner in which we have conducted the war on terror and the war in Iraq. They may well want some adjustments. But, according to Morris, when American voters begin to look closely at just who the Democrats would put in charge of oversight of these vitally important matters, they begin to think twice about a complete policy shift that the Democrats propose. The Republicans may not be perfect, but Americans seem to be wary of putting American security in the hands of those with dubious reputations on the subject. To make a complete change at this point would be too risky. Democrats do not fare well in this area.

Thus, there is a growing shift of support among the masses for Republican candidates just within the last few days. This is not to say that there will not be some Republican casualties. They will lose some of their strength both in the Senate and the House. But at this point it appears that most of the major races in the country are still very competitive, which is certainly good news for Mr. Bush and the Republicans.

Monday, October 23, 2006

Important Loretta Nall Information Updates

Alabama Libertarian Loretta Nall has been in the national spotlight today with an Associated Press exclusive interview. The news coverage created such a heightened interest in the Nall campaign for Governor that heavy traffic to her website resulted in a shut-down.

Nall has a nifty new website running at:

Internet surfers can still access her blog at

The AP story provides informative insights on Nall's history, campaign, and political philosophy.

Be sure to visit her sites for continuous campaign updates as we head into the final stretch.

Beneath the Surface A Global Muslim Cauldron Boils

Muslim Unrest Sets Cities Ablaze

I will state at the outset that I am no fan of the New York Times. What was once a trusted and respected national leader in news reporting has disintegrated into a hodge-podge of questionable ethics, bogus stories, and sensationalism closely akin to the National Equirer.

Be that as it may, this past Sunday's Times contained a series of unrelated stories, found in different sections of the paper, that all have a common thread. Beneath the surface in various parts of the world there is a boiling cauldron of extremist Muslim rage and unrest that is on the brink of exploding. France, Great Britain, Russia, and Israel, and ultimately the United States, share one ominous commonality. They are the recipients of the rage of extremist Muslim Jihadists who seem to be working in concert in various parts of the world in an effort to destroy Western civilization as we know it and implement their vision of the 'will of Allah.'

Nowhere does the Times, however, mention this group by name. Never are they referred to as 'Muslim' or 'Jihadists' or 'Islamic extremists.' The Times is far too politically correct to commit such a major faux pax. Rather, the Times refers to the simmering rage as being the work of 'Middle Eastern males' and 'North African males.'

A quick look at the map, along with the cultural and religious demographics will make all too clear what the Times refuses to name.

The violence that France experienced in the recent past is again on the upswing, so much so that even moderate French politicians are beginning to sound like Jean Le Pen, the ultra-rightwing rabble-rouser who posits a disdain for immigration and calls for a return to an independent France that is free from the European Union and the use of the Euro. All efforts of the French thus far to abate the swelling current of violence, mayhem, and hostility have failed. Muslim extremists are now luring police into violent neighborhoods by making bogus emergency calls claiming that autos are on fire and exploding. Police who respond to such calls are then ambushed at the scene, beaten, tortured, and killed. The same ruse is used to lure in unsuspecting paramedics and firefighters, who also take the brunt of the Islamic brutality.

London is now experiencing a similar phenomenon, prompting Great Britain's Minister of Social Order to lament the inability of the UK to adequately assimilate Muslim immigrants, resulting in yet another swelling tide of hostility among this rapidly growing minority.

Russia is now yet another victim of the extremist Muslim rage, according to the Times. Russian officials report a sharp increase of violence in certain sectors of the country, in which citizens are targeted for beatings and murder.

Meanwhile, Iran once again is rattling its sabers against Jews, stating that 'Israel has no reason to exist.' Iran's President has stated that unless the West, including all of Europe and the United States, ceases to support Israel, there will be dire consequences that will definitely spill over into Europe and beyond, even to the rest of the world.

In addition, as I reported to you a week or so ago, Germany is not immune from the growing Muslim scourge, as the threat of violence was enough to shut down the performance of a Mozart opera in Berlin.

The Times never connects the dots with any of these stories.

Those with eyes to see, and ears to hear, can see the common thread readily. The world stands on the brink of a major conflict that will determine the very survival of the West. The equality of women, the liberty of the individual, the freedom of religious expression or of non-expression, are all marks of infidels to these warriors who have vowed to kill anyone and everyone who will not bow to the will of Allah.

Five years ago, after the Unites States was attacked on 9/11, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich stated that, 'whether we realize it or not, we are now in World War III.' Little did we know at that time just how right he was. At any given point in time these hotbeds of violence perpetrated by Muslim extremists could erupt into a coordinated world-wide Jihad that would set the globe spinning on its axis.

Appeasement is not the answer. We tried it. Each time we give a little, they want more. Nothing less than a total surrender to the extremist Islamic vision of government and religion will satisfy these blood-thirsty warriors.

Make no mistake, they are out for blood. Ask the residents of the Paris suburbs that are firebombed each night. Ask the families of the police officers killed when they responded to bogus emergency calls.

This is no time to devise a clever psychological, humanitarian scheme to 'reason' with this element. The West must name the enemy and fight it with all its might whenever and wherever it rears its ugly head. Let political correctness be damned.

The future of civilization as we know it is at stake.



Omaha, Nebraska has now become ground zero in the war on individual liberties with the city's elected officials implementing some of the strongest anti-smoking laws in the nation. The ban outlaws all PUBLIC smoking, as well as smoking inside restaurants and bars that serve food.

The Omaha Police Department is encouraging citizens who observe someone smoking to call 9-1-1.

Teresa Negron, sergeant in charge of public information for the police, explained the department encourages observers of infractions to pick up the phone to report the infraction--just like they would for any other crime they observe being committed.

Note the term 'crime' in the above sentence. Apparently smokers are now considered criminals along with rapists and murderers in Omaha. It is now a CRIME to smoke!

Omaha banned smoking in public Oct. 2. Penalties are $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second and $500 for the third and subsequent infractions. Who would be willing to guess that these Omaha politicians who supported such a flagrant violation of personal freedom are NOT Libertarians, and probably not Republicans, either!

Apparently however, Omaha police and emergency coordinators do not see eye-to-eye on citizens using the Emergency 9-1-1- system to report smokers. According to Douglas County Emergency Mark Conrey, if people dial 9-1-1 every time they see someone lighting up in a restricted area, the county's Emergency 9-1-1 system could be severely hampered in receiving calls for real emergencies. 'The very idea threatens Douglas County's emergency system,' Conrey said.

Undaunted by Conrey's concerns, Omaha police insist that residents should use the 9-1-1 system to report smoking law violators.

After all, we would not want these dangerous, hardened criminals left to wander the streets unleashing their mayhem on the citizens of Omaha.

What will be next? Dialing 9-1-1 if you spot someone eating a high-fat double cheeseburger in a restaurant?

Democrats Set to Wreak Havoc If They Win

Hillary Rodham Clinton, shown above, will be a very powerful woman come November if her Party wins control of Congress. This should stand her in good stead for her upcoming run for the Presidency in two years. A powerful Hillary in the Senate will be a perfect platform from which she can launch her national campaign, consolidate her power, and find her way to the evening news lead stories for the next two years, all without having to purchase campaign ads.

The national news media, co-conspirators in the Clinton/Clinton/George Soros/ drive to put Hillary in the White House, will no doubt be more than willing to give her all the coverage she needs.

This man, of course, stands to increase his power and influence with the Democrats in charge. Senator Kennedy, along with Senator John Kerry and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, are the three of the most liberal members of Congress. The trio will no doubt unleash on unsuspecting Americans an extremist, leftist agenda that will make even the most steady stalwarts' heads spin.

Al Gore believes that human beings are to blame for global warming, ignoring scientific data that clearly shows the world has undergone these variances in climate many times in its history, usually due to the position and intensity of the sun. Sunspots are often to blame for a warming of global temperatures. Yet Gore would implement some of the most stringent measures that would cost corporations billions of dollars and that would severely hamper and intrude upon the citizens' right to making their own free choices in a free society.

Of course this is Nancy Pelosi, the next U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives and 3rd in line to the Presidency in a Democrat-controlled House. Pelosi represents the most liberal section of the country, California's infamous San Francisco district, which many refer to as 'the People's Republic of California.'

The following is an article written by Stan Kattan, former analyst for RAND, Inc. Many thanks to the 'Capt'n and the Damsel' for alerting us to this article. It is a bit lengthy but well worth the time and effort to read it. It will open your eyes as to what we face in a Democrat-controlled Congress.

What We're In For If Democrats Take Over

By Stan Katten

Nov. 7 will bring one of the most important national elections in recent times, possibly in the entire history of America. The future of the nation's security, economy and its culture could well rest on the outcome of this usually mundane midterm election.

One contestant is the Democratic Party, which has been taken over by socialists who dislike America and capitalism. The other is the Republican Party, with a few moderates who frequently join with the Democrats and use the filibuster to impose minority control of the Senate, requiring 60 instead of 51 votes to pass legislation.

Republicans, independents and moderate Democrats should ignore the "October surprises" -- the Mark Foley revelation, the generals' revolt and Bob Woodward's new book, In Denial.

These anti-Republican or anti-Bush developments somehow happened a few weeks before the election. We must keep foremost in mind the real and vital issues: national security, the economy and the societal values that the Democrats are striving to obscure.

A House or Senate controlled by Democrats will try to accomplish what the liberals have been striving for since Al Gore failed to reverse the 2000 presidential election -- bring down the Bush administration by blocking everything it proposes and reversing its accomplishments, regardless of the negative and often dangerous consequences:
--Withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq and Afghanistan, surrendering to the terrorists.
--Abandon the fledging Iraqi government, permitting an Iranian-backed insurgent to take over.
--Launch impeachment charges against President Bush for "lying the United States into war."
--Abandon the Afghanistan government, allowing a Taliban resurgence.
--Stop all CIA and National Security Agency monitoring programs used to help prevent terrorist attacks.
--Grant citizen civil rights to Guantanamo Bay detainees. This would include providing lawyers for civil criminal trials.
--Stop fencing the border, allowing more than a million illegal immigrants per year to enter the nation.
--Provide five-year amnesty for illegal immigrants, including up to 66 million family members.
--Grant driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
--Cancel Bush's tax cuts, increasing average taxes by 15 percent to 20 percent.
--Continue the federal estate tax, returning to former confiscatory rates and exclusion.
--Increase the federal tax on gasoline 50 or more cents per gallon.
--Block appointments of strict constitutionalist judges.
--Extend prohibitions on increasing domestic recovery of petroleum.
--Approve same-sex marriages.
--Continue to refuse to make English the official national language.
--Seek United Nations and European Union approval for U.S. foreign policy.
--Cede U.S. trade policy to control by the World Trade Organization.
--Subvert the Constitution by participating in organizations like the World Court.
--Participate in military efforts only as part of United Nations forces.
--Add more entitlement programs, like socialized health care.
--Increase environmental regulations and restrictions.
--Sign the Kyoto Treaty despite widespread signatory noncompliance.
--Further empower trial lawyers by removing all limits on awards.
--Continue to block picture identification to impede voter fraud.
--Continue the idiotic prohibition on racial profiling at airports.
--Refuse to simplify the tax system and improve Social Security.

If you think these are exaggerations, check the liberal Democrats' and environmentalists' Web sites, including the George Soros-funded Read Gore's book Earth in the Balance and view his new global- warming scare movie. Review the Democrats' obstructionist record in Congress and their traitorous undermining of the war on terror. Note former President Clinton's failures to capture or kill Osama bin Laden because he considered terrorists criminals, even though bin Laden had declared war against the United States years earlier.

Read the speeches of the Democrat leaders: John Kerry, Jack Murtha, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, Al Gore, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Charles Rangel, John Conyers and even Rep. Jane Harman.

Regarding the Democrats' positions on national security, consider why avowed U.S. enemies such as al-Qaida, Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran, Syria, North Korea and Iraqi insurgents are striving to make the Bush administration look bad, thereby helping election of a Democratic Congress.

Republicans accuse the Democrats of offering no specific proposals for the changes they demand, only platitudes that they will do everything better, aside from immediate withdrawal from Iraq. In fact, they have extensive positions and objectives, but they dare not expose them as an integrated program for fear of total rejection at the ballot box.

Also, every Republican who, because of dissatisfaction with some actions or non-actions of the Bush administration, fails to vote would be passively voting for a liberal extremist control of Congress, possibly leading to further subversion of our Constitution by more liberal judiciary.

These possible consequences are relevant for all voters, not just Republicans, because all our lives and those of our children and grandchildren may very well depend on continued and strengthened Republican control of the federal government.

Stan Katten is a former RAND Corp. analyst and a San Pedro resident.

If all of our worst fears are realized, I'm sure that 'Babs' Streisand will have much to smile about.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Libertarian Loretta Nall, Two Weeks To Go

Alabama Libertarian Loretta Nall is eyeing the final stretch of her gubernatorial campaign and has posted her speaking engagements on her website at

The Alabama native will conduct a multi-city campaign blitz in the waning days of the race toward the Governor's mansion. Recent polls show that she trails Governor Bob Riley and Lt. Governor Lucy Baxley (who is now running for Governor). However, there has been a growing air of discontent among the ranks of some Riley supports who have been stung by his refusal to resign from a racist Grand Lodge of Freemasonry. The story made national news in the past week.

In addition, Nall could well benefit from a silent but growing discontent among Alabama voters toward candidates of BOTH parties. Riley, the Republican, raised the ire of conservative voters by attempting to raise taxes by a billion dollars in 2003, a move which the Governor supported with bogus claims that the state was going broke. Lucy Baxley, the Democrat, is a typical liberal who marches in lockstep with the national Party, but has portrayed herself as a thrifty conservative who would roll back property taxes.

Nall is the only candidate of the three who brings to the table an honest approach to government, supporting low taxes and free commerce, a smaller more accountable government, a state lottery for education that would not be managed by state government but by private enterprise, the development of bio-diesel fuel that could result in a boon for farmers in the state's impoverished 'black belt,' an unabashed advocacy for 2nd Amendment rights and a repeal of all gun control laws, and support for tax incentives for parents to send their children to private schools or to homeschool their young.

Nall's fledgling campaign, of course, is lacking the 'big bucks' that the two major Parties have, which are filled by and large by powerful special interest groups and individuals. Thus, her shoestring campaign has relied heavily on smaller individual donations, particularly at those times she will be traveling across the state. Now is such a time, as she encourages supporters to make their donations now so that she can appear at her various engagements across Alabama.

Be sure to visit her campaign website at:

Do You Want This Woman 3rd In Line to the Presidency?

Nancy Pelosi, D-Ca, serving California's most ultra-liberal San Francisco district. stands to be 3rd in line to the Presidency if the Democrats win the House in two weeks. Pelosi has served as minority leader of the House and would be selected to become Speaker, replacing current Speaker Dennis Hastart, should the Democrats take control.

This is a most ghastly prospect for the country if one carefully and objectively considers Pelosi's record on the issues. Here is a primer--

*Pelosi has received the lowest rating possible for a politician by 'Gun Owners of America' for her consistent stance against 2nd Amendment issues. As a staunch San Francisco liberal, Pelosi has steadily advocated for an erosion of gun owner rights, ignoring the provisions of the U.S. Constitution, and voting for legislation that would criminalize gun owners whose guns are stolen and then used in the commission of a crime, among other notable tactics of the anti-bun bigots.

*Pelosi stated recently that national security should NOT be an issue in this campaign for control of the U.S. Congress in 2006. Most Americans strongly disagree, placing the issue in the top 5.

*Pelosi voted against the Bush tax cuts and has vowed to repeal them in a Democrat-controlled Congress. Throughout her career she has voted consistently for tax increases on a variety of levels, the most notable being a string of votes during the 90s that would have resulted in Americans paying over $950 more dollars per year in gasoline taxes, if they had passed. In addition, during the 1990s Pelosi voted for measures that increased taxes by nearly 241 billion dollars, the largest tax hike in American history under Bill Clinton.

*Pelosi was recently quoted as saying that the capture of Osama bin Laden 'would not make America any safer.'

*Pelosi has consistently voted against welfare reform, against requiring welfare recipients to work, and a host of other measures that more moderate members of her Party joined with Republicans in supporting.

*Pelosi is a rabid abortion supporter, receiving a 100% rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America, and a 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

*Pelosi has advocated for 'bi-lateral talks' with the North Koreans over nuclear weapons, calling for a return to the failed policies of the Clinton Administration in the 90s during which Kim Jong-il not only lied but duped the Americans into believing he was using the materials we were sending him for his nation's energy supply, when all the while he was building nuclear weapons, as he admitted in 2002. The Bush Administration has insisted all along that talks with Kim should be multi-lateral, including the Chinese, given the fact that Kim will listen to no one but the Chinese government. Bush was proved right this past week as Kim apologized for the nuclear tests after receiving a sharp rebuke from China. Pelosi, however, prefers a return to the policies that led to our being the laughing stock of Kim Jong-il.

Are you excited yet? This brief primer should be ample reason to fear this woman rising to such a position of prominence as Speaker of the House should the Democrats win control.

However, Pelosi is not the only problem. The Democrat Party is swarming with other Nancy Pelosi just waiting to gain control of Congress so that they can unleash on the nation their extremist, leftist agenda that will be a harsh blow to American liberty.

We as Americans MUST not allow this to happen.

Mother by D. Martyn Lloyd-Morgan

We lost her in the month of October as the weather grows cooler and the days shorten, as if she were beckoned to heaven by the changing color of autumn leaves. Her struggle with cancer had left her depleted and weary, her relief and permanent healing only provided by her abiding faith in One who would transport her to another realm where suffering is no more.

Welsh singer/writer/poet Donna Lewis speaks of her Mother as the one who showed her the way through 'the chosen words' of everlasting faith and hope. I can fully relate. But more about that a bit later.

My Mother was a woman of unusual strength and determination, buoyed constantly by a faith that would not flinch in the face of seeming insurmountable obstacles. But my most vivid and poignant memories of her are from boyhood, having spent many a day suffering from the frightening plight of childhood asthma.

I remember as a boy feeling as if I were smothering once the lights went out at night. I am not certain of any scientific or medical evidence suggesting that this is common among the victims of childhood asthma, but nonetheless, I remember having the distinct and frightening feeling that my struggle to breath was made worse by the darkness.

Many a night during those days I would get up and go to the den, where there was always a light. Some way, somehow, though she were sound asleep, my Mother would always sense my presence in the den, and before long she would be by my side sitting in the chair as I reclined on the sofa.

Sometimes she would hold my hand, other times she would get me medicine to help me breath. Sometimes she would hold my head as I threw up from the drugs that were given for the asthma.

Eventually, sleep would slowly overtake me unaware. I would awaken in the morning as the light of the sun came through the window. Invariably as I would look to my side, I would find my Mother still there, sometimes sleeping softly in the chair, sometimes watching me as I awakened.

In some indescribable fashion, the terror that the night brought to a small boy who suffered from asthma was always greatly relieved by the presence of my Mother...and the knowledge that she would be there at the dawning of the morning's light.

Her memory forever lives on in my heart, undimmed by the passage of time. And when October comes, I still feel the sadness of the day we lost her to that higher realm of being.

Donna Lewis, the Welsh singer/songwriter, burst onto the music scene in this country in 1996 with the hit single 'I Love You Always, Forever.' On that same recording is a song that also received some acclaim, though it never reached the level of success as her initial release. It is called simply, 'Mother.'

The song is profound. And it bears an uncanny similarity to my own experience and feelings associated with my Mother. In loving tribute of my Mother, I offer you these captivating words from Donna Lewis.

by Donna Lewis

And I can hear you calling my name
Your healing hands smooth away the pain
And I can hear you whispering
'It'll be alright''ll stay until the night breaks into day

You are my light ... in the dark
You stand beside me
You take my hand ... show me the way
You're here to guide me
You give me the strength ... that I need
You give me shelter
You gave me life ... you gave me love
You are my mother

And when you hear me calling your name (I hear your voice)
You touch me with your chosen words
Everlasting faith, everlasting love is the greatest gift you have
Believing understanding me


Closer ... closer ... closer to heaven are you
You are my light in the dark
You take my hand and show me the way
You give me the strength that I need
You gave me life you gave me love