Google Custom Search

Saturday, October 06, 2007

EXPLOSIVE DETAILS! Duke Lacrosse Students Sue!

As expected, the three Duke lacrosse students who were falsely accused and charged of rape by a rogue district attorney who has since been disbarred and sent to jail, have filed a lawsuit in North Carolina against D.A. Mike Nifong, the City of Durham, and others connected to the case.

Former Duke students David F. Evans, Collin Finnerty, and Reade Seligmann filed the lawsuit Friday against not only Nifong and the City of Durham, but Mark Gottlieb, Linwood Wilson, DNA Security, Inc., and nearly a dozen others named as Defendants.

Conspicuously missing from the lawsuit is Duke University, which treated the three students mercilessly and proclaimed their guilt early on, thus smearing their good names around Durham and the rest of the country.

As the story of the three falsely accused and maligned players unfolded, a small, unknown blog began to draw attention due to the thorough, relentless pursuit of truth that its team of writers and attorneys exhibited. Thus, 'Liestoppers' burst onto the scene with explosive information that shed light on the vermin scurrying around in Durham, exposing the corruption of the D.A.'s office and the City of Durham in general.

This one blog single-handedly brought the truth to light, and were it not for Liestoppers the corruption of Nifong and his gang would have never come to light, and three innocent students would be in jail.

With the lawsuit now filed by the three victims, Liestoppers is once again on the cutting edge, providing information not only about the lawsuit but about the explosive details the suit is bringing to light.

You can find that information by clicking here:

Symbols Mean Something, Senator

Senator Barack Obama took off his American flag lapel pin.

Stating that from now on he will speak about the meaning of the flag rather than wear it, the Democratic Presidential hopeful has obviously failed to grasp the importance of symbols, particularly on the part of one who would be President. Wearing the flag, it would seem, would present even MORE opportunities to explain what the flag means than taking it off.

In fact, the candidate symbolically declared today why he is unfit to be President in one simple symbolic act.

Men who would be President of our country do not shun symbols of our flag but embrace them.

What does this act say, for example, to Kim Jong Ill, or Fidel Castro and the oppressed who live under Cuban Communism, or to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? A would-be President of the United States expresses disdain for wearing the symbol of his country? No doubt the act gives rise to the notion on the part of the tyrants of the world that Obama is ashamed of America's symbol.

There is but one reasonable explanation for Obama's actions. He feels it is much more important to appease the extremists who have seized control of the Democratic Party than to express allegiance to his country. He would rather please anti-war activists who have spit on the flag and burned it, referred to our troops in Iraq as murderers, and who have denigrated our military in general by referring to one of its top commanders, General Petraeus, as a traitor, than to overtly and proudly display the world's number one symbol of freedom.

George Soros,, and Media Matters are very proud, I am sure.

Thus, here is yet one more example of the swiftness with which Democrats embrace symbolic, anti-American gestures. The Dems can't appear too patriotic lest they alienate their main donor base.

The actions of Barack Obama hearken back to another era in America, during and after the Viet Nam War when the Democratic Party increasingly came under the influence of anti-war activists. At the 1972, 1976, and 1980 Democratic National Conventions the American flag was basically nowhere to be seen.

In fact, one commentator commented that the Democrats had so alienated the American public by shunning the flag that in 1984 they basically wrapped themselves in the flag in a last-ditch effort to try to defeat Ronald Reagan.

Americans saw through the ruse and elected Ronald Reagan to a 2nd term in one of the biggest landslides in American history.

The Iraq War has once again pushed to Democrats to the far-Left, so far, in fact, that Americans are beginning to wake up. The Democratic controlled Congress certainly inspires no confidence among the public with its dismal and historic low public approval rating of 11%.

Perhaps Americans will connect the dots and see that the same disease that infests Congress also infests the Democratic Presidential candidates.

It is possible, of course, that Obama unconsciously recognizes that the positions he espouses are a desecration to the flag and the liberty it symbolizes. In that case, it is better to take the flag off in order to espouse anti-freedom than to wear it as a hypocrite.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/5/07

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

The executive leadership of Gun Owners of America has written an open letter today concerning H.R. 2640. Agree, disagree, or be undecided...nonetheless many even within the NRA membership agree with this. I hope that they didn't cross the line into an NRA-bash:

Nicki at The Liberty Zone reports that opposition to H.R. 2640 continues to mount:

Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership shares a letter from a college professor on the subject of the Second Amendment:

Oscar Poppa posts an article today on standing and trigger control:

Snow Flakes in Hell blogs today on threatening the political establishment:

Say Uncle points to an example of the Second Amendment misunderstood:

Red's Trading Post has the deal on Smith & Wesson 460 and 500s:

The Ninth Stage says that all the smoking bans taking place around the country would have made Joseph Stalin proud:

Also, The Ninth Stage points to a gun control advocate who changed her mind about the issue:

The War on Guns reports that Arnold still has not signed or vetoed the microstamping bill:

Traction Control says that I.C.E. is finally putting the heat on illegal aliens:

Tamara K. at A View from the Porch blogs on the brain-eating amoeba that is claiming an increasing number of victims in the U.S.:

Mike McCarville says that Wilson Research Strategies has the latest assessment of the compilation of all the polls on the 2008 Presidential race:

Alphecca posts more on the Supreme Court and the D.C. Gun Ban:

Alphecca also reports the great news that a Castle Doctrine bill has been introduced in West Virginia:

This is off topic, but those of you who enjoy visiting or reading about unique examples of Americana may be interested in this article about a national treasure in the south that is known for its down-home flavor and 'local color':

This sounds ominous. John Lott reports that there is another BIG U.N. push toward world-wide gun control:

The Jet Pilot posts this interesting sentiment from a resident of San Francisco, who wants the U.S. out of the city. Hey, let's oblige him. Of course if they get attacked by terrorists or N.Korean nukes, they are totally on their own:

One of our female shootists over at The Breda Fallacy blogs on pink guns:

GOP 3rd Quarter Fundraising Totals

Republican Presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani continued to lead the pack in fundraising, bringing in $11 million during the 3rd quarter.

Mitt Romney comes in at a close 2nd with $10 million dollars raised. But campaign sources disclosed that Romney put over $8 million of his own money into his campaign, meaning that he actually raised less than $2 million during the third quarter.

This is precisely why The Liberty Sphere has maintained that Romney's campaign is largely fluff and that his money carefully conceals the lack of support the candidate has been able to garner throughout the country.

Fred Thompson's 3rd quarter campaign earnings were much better than expected and topped earlier reports. The Thompson campaign reports that the candidate raised over 9 million during the 3rd quarter, the vast majority of that coming in during the month of September.

John McCain's totals for the 3rd quarter stand at $5 million--a vast improvement over projections. This would tend to support the candidate's contention that his campaign is experiencing a turn-around.

Ron Paul also raised $5 million during the 3rd quarter--his best showing to date. Yet Mr. Paul comes out ahead of McCain due to the fact that McCain was $2 million in the red, meaning that he has only $3 million to spend. Mr. Paul has most if not all of his $5 million to spend.

The rest of the Republican field of candidates raised much less than the top 5.

Thus, the Liberty Sphere offers an assessment of the success of the top 5 candidates based upon 2 factors--the total funds raised from the citizens and the amount of available cash on hand to spend.

Given these 2 important factors there are only 2 GOP candidates who approach the 4th quarter from a position of strength as compared to the rest of the field. Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson are in the best financial shape of all. Giuliani is way out in front in terms of available cash to spend, and Thompson comes in 2nd with roughly 8 million in available cash.

Mitt Romney's position in the field of candidates is a bit difficult to assess. From month to month it has been hard to track exactly how much of his campaign cash came from donors and how much he spent of his own money. The candidate has deep pockets, no doubt, and he is thus a major force with which to be reckoned. But it would be a mistake to place too much credence in Romney's ability to spend.

Thus, Ron Paul in our view comes in third with a solid showing of 5 million. His ability to run a frugal campaign relying on an army of Internet supporters has enabled the candidate to keep most of the money he has raised. He is in fairly good shape, and it would be a mistake to count him out.

John McCain is still a viable candidate. The Liberty Sphere had all but given up on his campaign for dead a couple of months ago. But the candidate has shown resilience and determination, even in the face of overwhelming odds.

McCain has also said he has heard the outcry of the citizens against his amnesty immigration reform bill, and he has thus changed his views to match those of the citizens who want our borders secure and illegal immigration stopped. We would still like to hear him say more about the glaring mistake of the McCain-Feingold act against free speech. If he comes clean about that, he could well be a come-from-behind candidate.

It certainly helped McCain to appear at the NRA and remind the nation that he has been a longtime supporter of 2nd Amendment rights. The NRA has given him fairly good marks through the years, despite the GOA's rating of 'F.' It is to be remembered, however, that the GOA's criteria for rating politicians is very strict, much more so than the NRA's.

While McCain is certainly not our 1st choice, not even our 2nd, 3rd, or 4th choice, he is someone we could see ourselves supporting against Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or for that matter ANY of the Democratic candidates.

But for now, we are pleased to see that Thompson is coming on strong, and we fully expect his fundraising to show even more success during the 4th quarter.

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Allenna Williams Ward and the 'Unbelievable' Teens

Many of us who wrote about the case of Allenna Williams Ward, the 23 year old Clinton, South Carolina school teacher who pleaded guilty to sexual misconduct with at least 5 teenage boys, believed that the story of the teens was unbelievable...literally.

We were very wrong.

This shows that 'tall tales,' even from the lips of the youngest among us, are worthy of a thorough investigation. In many if not most cases the tall tales are probably the imaginary sagas of young minds at work. But some of the stories will be true and we cannot take the risk of dismissing them.

The following update on the Allenna Williams Ward story shows how the diligent, quiet work of a state prosecutor under immense pressure from the public got to the truth of this case:

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/4/07

Scroll down for the news:

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Dustin's Gun Blog asks the question, To Disarm or Not to Disarm?

Tamara K. at A View from the Porch has an interesting tidbit of info on what occurred today 50 years ago:

MR. Completely blogs on getting ready for the Gun Bloggers Rendezvous in Reno beginning Oct. 11...and the things that can go wrong in the process:

Random Ramblings of a Republitarian provides an interesting step-by-step critique of some of the provisions of H.R. 2640:

Red's Trading Post gives us a review of the successful premier of the documentary 'In Search of the Second Amendment,' which opened in Idaho this week:

A Keyboard and a .45 alerts us to a shooting during which a burglar was shot by a concerned citizen after he saw the burglar breaking into his neighbor's home:

Armed and Safe says that the Illinois State Police are at it again, attempting to disarm law-abiding citizens:

Robb Allen at Sharp as a Marble gives us a late update on his mother after her cancer surgery:

The McCarville Report says that the attack dogs are out in full force as they attempt to unseat Senator Jim Inhofe, one of the biggest supporters of gun rights in the nation:

Blogonomicon reports on a firearm that Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership is offering:

The Buckeye Firearms Association provides information on a ruling by the Ohio Supreme Court, and the news isn't good:

The Volokh Conspiracy takes a look at an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal about Constitutional 'originalism':

John Lott reports that a group of college students are initiating a national day to draw attention to the failed policies of disarmament at colleges all across America:

Ann Coulter heads for the jugular on the Democrats' plan to censor Rush Limbaugh for something he did not say:

Traction Control says that he was called away on a very important mission:

The War on Guns reports the latest blather from 'Little Chucky' Schumer on the difficulty of negotiating with Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn (Coburn has blocked progression of H.R. 2640):

Say it's not true, Lamar! Say Uncle reports that Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander has joined Democrats in a plan to tax the Internet by adding a surcharge to our phone bills:

Oscar Poppa has the cartoon editorial of the day, and it's a good one!:

Of Arms and the Law reports that the plaintiffs in the Parker case have filed a response to the petition:

Snow Flakes in Hell has the video of the Fox interview with Fred and Jeri Thompson last night:

The Bitch Girls write on the constitutionality of lethal injection:

Two-Pronged Attack on Limbaugh/O'Reilly

Two things immediately come to mind concerning the attacks this week on Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly.

First, the notions that Limbaugh is 'against our troops' as the Democratic leadership in Congress claims, and that Bill O'Reilly is a racist as some in the mainstream media claim, are so completely ludicrous as to be laughable. Over the past 20 years as America's premier radio talk show host, no one has been more supportive of the American military than Rush Limbaugh. And those who know Bill O'Reilly know that the man is nowhere near being a racist.

These charges make those who claim them look like buffoons who cannot be taken seriously.

That would be no problem at all were it not for the fact that the nation's top Democrats are saying these things, from Harry Reid, to Hillary Clinton, to Tom Harkin, and many more. Their charges against Rush Limbaugh are so utterly over-the-top as to render the entire lot irrelevant.

Second, it is important to keep in mind who is bankrolling these types of character assassinations. The same money that is behind and its Petraeus-bash is also behind the orchestrated attacks on Limbaugh and O'Reilly.

Media Matters is part of the same network of ultra-leftwing organizations that include It was Media Matters that took O'Reilly's statement out of context and labeled him a racist--a story picked up by CNN without even thoroughly checking out the veracity of the story.

Both Media Matters and get much of their funding from atheist Democrat billionaire operative George Soros.

Democrats depend on these groups for the majority their political campaign cash. And thus, while the country desperately needs leadership from Congress on a variety of issues of crucial importance to our future, the Democratic leadership spends taxpayers' money to go on a character assassination spree against two conservative talk show personalities.

Many inside the Beltway believe that this is only the first step, a dark foreshadowing of what is to come if the Democrats gain the White House. The Fairness Doctrine, as it is envisioned by Democrats, is designed to silence conservative voices in the media.

For example, with Hillary in the White House and the Democrats in Control of both Houses of Congress, there would be nothing to stop the march toward implementing the Fairness Doctrine, which would force Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, and many more off the air.

Thus, once again the Leftwing will be in complete control of all media as it was from the 1940s until the 1990s.

Perhaps the Democrats in Congress and on the campaign trail for the Presidency are underestimating the American people. The citizens have already seen the garbage, and therefore they are giving Congress the lowest approval rating in history--a mere 11%.

Further, a backlash occurred against the Democrats with the Moveon-Petraeus ad. We can reasonably expect yet another backlash as apparently the Dems have lost not only their political compass but their minds as well.

As the old political saying goes, these character assassinations 'will not play in Peoria.'

Wednesday, October 03, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/3/07

Scroll down for the news:

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Red's Trading Post says it's time to shut it down (the ATF):

Oscar Poppa has today's MUST-read!:

Of Arms and the Law points to a new article on gun confiscation and genocide:

Armed and Safe has a good post today on assault weapons vs. patrol rifles:

Alphecca says that the secession movement in Vermont is spreading:

A Keyboard and a .45 takes a look at the various methods of execution that the U.S. Supreme Court is considering:

The McCarville Report points to excellent commentary on the Rush Limbaugh flap trumped up by the Democrats, which is actually much ado about nothing:

Michelle Malkin also comes to Rush's defense:

Remember Susan Smith? She is the South Carolina mother of 2 who sent her children to their deaths by rolling the car they were in down the hill into a lake. Here is an update:

Snow Flakes in Hell provides part 2 of his assessment of the speeches given by political candidates at the NRA Celebration of American Values:

The Bitch Girls say that certain left-wing organizations are attempting to break the Right's hold on religious folk:

The War on Guns asks 'a fair question':

Traction Control blogs today about the memorial to the hijackers we seem to be building in the name of remembering the victims of 9/11:

The Buckeye Firearms Association posts the news story about 2 innocent Ohioans whose lives were saved by firearms:

Gun Owners of America issued a new alert TODAY about H.R. 2640, Senator Coburn, and the American Legion:

Dustin's Gun Blog writes about the Ben Avery Clay Target Center in Arizona:

Fred's $8 Million

Early reports on Monday indicated that Fred Thompson had raised over $8 million dollars for his campaign during the third quarter. This has been confirmed by the Thompson campaign.

Thompson is still running behind his closest rivals, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, when it comes to campaign cash. Romney continues to benefit from the use of his own private funds which he channels into his campaign.

Both Ron Paul and John McCain came on strong during the third quarter. Mr. Paul raised around $5 million and so did McCain. Yet McCain is reportedly $2 million bucks in the red. With his strong showing in the third quarter, however, he could yet be a force with which to be reckoned in the long run.

The mainstream media are sure to downplay the significance of Thompson's $8 million, just as they did when he announced he had raised $3.5 million before he had even announced as a candidate. After all, Thompson's campaign funds are dwarfed by those of Giuliani and Romney.

However, one must bear in mind that Thompson only announced during the first week of September. Fully two months of the third quarter had passed before he jumped into the race. This means, of course, that the totals Giuliani and Romney have posted for the third quarter include all three months, not just one.

I believe it is fairly safe to say that it is highly doubtful that any Republican candidate has raised $8 million bucks in one month. This makes Thompson's totals all the more impressive.

Impressive, that is, until one begins to look at the totals raised by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The Democrats have out-raised the Republicans 2-to-1 so far.

Thompson has some serious catching up to do in order to be competitive in the general election against Hillary or Obama.

But then, let's not forget to bear in mind the all-important question, how much of that money the top two Democrats are raising is 'dirty money' funded by sleazy pyramid schemes in the murky world of corrupt political fundraisers?

And even more importantly than that, when will the mainstream media begin treating Norman Hsu as the Democrats' Jack Abramoff?

Tuesday, October 02, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/2/07

Scroll down for the news:

Images courtesy of A Human Right.

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

The Ninth Stage has the Presidential Candidate Test to see who matches your political views:

The Bitch Girls blog on the subject of free speech and double standards. A good post!:

Also, the Bitch Girls post excellent commentary on demonizing guns and dogs:

The Liberty Zone writes about the insanity across the pond:

Snow Flakes in Hell hits the nail on the head with this one! He says it like I like it. YEAH, what he said!!:

Sebastian also blogs about spreading the bullshhhtttt around. Another good one!:

Traction Control has the story of a 74 year old woman in Houston, Texas who got the SWAT team called down upon her:

The War on Guns reports a strange designation issued by the USDA:

The McCarville Report tells us how much the various Presidential candidates have raised in Oklahoma. Some surprises tucked in there!:

For those who may be interested in the severe drought in certain parts of the country, Carolina Countryside News has the scoop on the toll the drought has taken on livestock farmers in SC:

A Keyboard and a .45 blogs about the Fifty Caliber Institute's fundraiser:

Alphecca informs us of the sickening news of the lawsuit against gun manufacturers in Indiana:

Armed and Safe reminds us that the paperwork for buying a gun has already been filled out:

Cap'n Bob and the Damsel opine on the self-defense paradox in the D.C. gun case:

Random Ramblings of a Republitarian provides analysis of the issue of guns in schools:

Say Uncle says that there are some NITwits out interesting read!:

Sharp as a Marble gives us an update on his Mother's cancer surgery:

Michelle Malkin has this update on Senator Tom Harkin, the ultimate fake war his own admission!:

Gun Law News provides an update on D.C. v. Heller:

Tamara K. writes about Tennessee's stupid smoking law that just went into effect:

The New Citizenship Test

The U.S. government has rolled out a new citizenship test to be given to those who desire to become legal citizens of the United States of America. Compared to the old test, this one comes up dreadfully short.

Patrick Henry is no longer considered required knowledge for those seeking citizenship. There is not a single question on Henry on the new test, compared to 3 on the old test.

Yet those who composed the new test must believe that knowing that Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker of the House is required knowledge. A question on the exam asks, 'Who is the current Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives?'

Understandably, there is a question on the exam about Martin Luther King, Jr. This is a part of the nation's history and is therefore part of our identity.

Nonetheless, the new test is short on U.S. history and long on 'current events.'

I'm sorry but I can't for the life of me figure out how a knowledge of current events makes one a good U.S. citizen. A person can be a citizen of Cuba or Venezuela and be fairly knowledgeable about current events.

The thing that makes a person a good citizen of the U.S. is a knowledge of and appreciation for our unique history, our form of government, our Constitution.

I would like to see prospective citizens answer questions such as, 'What are the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution commonly called?' Another is, 'Name the four components of the First Amendment.' Yet another would be, 'What individual right does the Second Amendment protect?'

And then of course I would include a question concerning the one thing named within the text of the Constitution that indicates the only legitimate role of government.

It would be absolutely essential that prospective citizens know who were Patrick Henry, Alexander Hamilton, George Mason, along with their contributions to the Republic. Added to that would be questions about the first three Presidents.

Granted, such questions would make becoming a citizen much more difficult. I make no apology for that. We should demand that only those with a basic knowledge of American history and government be allowed as citizens.

There are far too many among the present citizenry who are alarmingly clueless concerning these vital facts. Perhaps all of us should be required to take the test periodically.

Monday, October 01, 2007

Second Amendment News Roundup for 10/1/07

Focusing on guns and politics, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:

Mike McCarville is reporting today that controversy has ensued and questions are swirling concerning Newt Gingrich's decision not to seek the GOP '08 Presidential nomination:

Alphecca blogs on 'the people of the gun.' To join the tribe, just send in your pic:

The Jet Pilot opines on the 'lights out' hour in Los Angeles:

In case you missed this gem last Thursday, A Keyboard and a .45 reports on a great program in Irving, Texas to address the growing problem of criminal illegal aliens:

Xavier Thoughts posts this item on muzzle-loaders, and it seems the anti-gun crowd has seized upon it as one of their new issues:

Traction Control is reporting great news for Fred Thompson, if this turns out to be verified. Preliminary reports indicate that Thompson raised over $8 million in September alone:

The War on Guns gives us yet another example of a numbskull anti-gun bigot:

The Liberty Zone provides us with an interesting read entitled, 'Tales from the Gun Free Zones':

Robb Allen at Sharp as a Marble reports that his mother will have cancer surgery tomorrow. I'm sure you all will join me in wishing her well, along with a speedy recovery:

Of Arms and the Law provides a MUST-read on the ATF from the perspective of an insider:

Say Uncle has a list of vital links on the mammoth problems of the ATF. This is important!:

Snow Flakes in Hell shows us why gun control advocates in the U.S. could learn a lot from Australia's experience:

The Bitch Girls blog about the plan for the states to collect sales taxes on Internet purchases:

John Lott points to an example of Mitt Romney's attitude toward guns and gunowners:

Michelle Malkin updates Hillary Clinton's penchant for using pyramid schemes to fund her campaigns:

Our favorite intellectual, Dr. Walter Williams, comments on the Democrats' plan to raise taxes on gasoline by 50 cents per gallon to combat 'global warming':

The Volokh Conspiracy notes that the '07-'08 session of the U.S. Supreme Court opens today:

Red's Trading Post is urging readers to contact their U.S. Senators to urge them to block confirmation of Michael Sullivan as head of the ATF. Sullivan supports the tactics of the ATF in trampling the rights of citizens, gun shop owners in particular:

Ryan also says that the Firearms Coalition has a new website:

Armed and Safe writes about the 'coalition to support government tyranny':

Blogonomicon writes a gripping account of a sobering morning at church yesterday, after an elderly congregant was forced to use firearms to defend his neighbors against a home invasion:

The most beautiful blond on earth, Blonde Sagacity, comments on the new U.S. citizenship test:

Mr. Completely reports on Nevada's new reciprocity laws for concealed carry:

Tamara K. at A View from the Porch blogs on the .32:

Can Dobson Doom the Giuliani Candidacy?

Gentlemen, it is time for a reasonable compromise.

These words form the basis of my message to Dr. James Dobson, the pediatrician and director of radio's Focus on the Family, who stated in no uncertain terms over the weekend that evangelical Christians would never under any circumstance support Rudy Giuliani for President.

Dobson's comments came as a result of several days of meetings with other powerful Christian conservative voices--persons of enormous influence in the heartland of America.

Focus on the Family is one of the most popular and influential radio broadcasts in the nation today, boasting tens of millions of listeners. This puts Dobson in an elite category of king-makers in this nation, given that he can deliver over 10 million voters for a political candidate.

The movers and shakers within the Republican Party ignore Dobson to their peril. Ever since 1980 when Ronald Reagan was able to form a powerful coalition of religious and social conservatives, blue-collar conservative Democrats, as well as traditional Republicans, Christian evangelicals have been considered a valuable part of the decision-making process within the Republican Party.

While there are many who look askance at Dobson's claim to wielding that much power over policy makers, even to the point of choosing a Presidential candidate, it is still of vital importance that his voice be heard and that his views be taken seriously.

The crux of Dobson's disdain for Rudy Giuliani centers on one issue--abortion. Christian conservatives abhor abortion as a blight on the nation's conscience. Giuliani has made it clear he will not back down on his lifelong support of a woman's right to an abortion.

Dobson's response? If Giuliani is the nominee, he and his army of millions will stay home on election day or find a different candidate to support outside the two Parties.

The threat is dangerous. Should Dobson and his supporters sit out election day in 2008, it could be enough to tip the scales in favor of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama, or whoever the Democrat may be. And should the Dobson coalition back a different candidate, too many voters would be drawn away from the GOP, which would also throw the election to the Democrats.

In essence Dobson has delivered an ultimatum to the Republican Party. If the GOP chooses a social liberal, Dobson and company will either stay home or support a third Party candidate, which will mean the election of the nation's worst nightmare in the form of Hillary Clinton or one of the other Democrats.

Further, Dobson has indicated that he has serious problems with John McCain and Mitt Romney. He has also stated he doesn't like Fred Thompson. But the ultimatum centers squarely upon no one other than Rudy Giuliani. Perhaps he could be persuaded about the others.

And this brings us back to my original message to Dr. Dobson and his colleagues. Gentlemen, we hear you. We need your support to elect someone who takes the Constitution and our nation's history seriously rather than a liberal who simply doesn't care.

Thus, it is time for a reasonable compromise. Many of us out here who have not yet had the chance to cast a vote in a primary have major problems with Giuliani for various reasons. Say we agree with you that Giuliani should not be the nominee. What are you willing to give us in return?

If we give a decisive thumbs-down to Giuliani and choose one of the other GOP candidates, will you then support that person?

For example, Fred Thompson may not be your favorite person. But we like what we hear when he speaks. He has been straight as an arrow in his support for gun rights, the war on terror, complete freedom of religious expression and speech, and he has stated repeatedly that Roe v. Wade is a terrible ruling.

What more could you want? The man is in your corner.

But Thompson isn't the only one. There are several more GOP candidates about whom the very same things could be said.

And so, Dr. Dobson, if we deliver on your ultimatum that Giuliani be denied the nomination, what are you willing to do for us in return? Many of us believe that at the very least you should lend your support to the person we choose, even if it is Thompson, McCain, or Romney.

I strongly believe that such a reasonable compromise will be for the ultimate good of the country.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Jefferson's Opposition to Standing Army-Navy

As a matter of principle, Thomas Jefferson had expressed opposition to the concept of a standing army and navy in the years just after the nation's founding. This was in spite of the fact that the Constitution to which he swore allegiance stated that the one essential element of the federal government was to provide for the national defense.

In Jefferson's mind there was no contradiction between his stated philosophy and the words of the Constitution. He believed in a citizens' militia--an army of ordinary citizens who could be ready to fight for the nation's defense whenever necessary.

Jefferson had been one of the driving forces behind adopting the Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution. While the Constitution itself was ratified on September 17, 1787, the original document did not contain a 'Bill of Rights' as we know it today.

Certain of the nation's Founding Fathers had vehemently opposed the notion of a Constitution precisely due to the fact that it contained no guarantee of individual rights. Patrick Henry was one of these.

Due to the influence of Jefferson, Henry, and others determined to protect the inherent rights of all human beings, the Bill of Rights was approved on December 15, 1791 after the required number of states had given approval.

Jefferson's opposition to a standing army and his commitment to the nation's defense are entirely consistent when one considers the two concepts within the context of the Bill of Rights.

The second section of the Bill of Rights, known as The Second Amendment, made clear that the nation's defense would be the task of every citizen. Each individual citizen would together form a well-regulated, meaning trained, militia.

It was assumed that these citizens would be armed. That assumption is expressed by Jefferson himself many times in his public statements and written documents. Jefferson believed that an armed citizenry was the perfect defense against the tyranny of big government.

Thus, Jefferson's opposition to a standing army and navy was in no way regarded as a belief in public disarmament. To the contrary, Jefferson believed that a standing military was rendered relatively unimportant if not unnecessary specifically due to the fact that he knew the individual citizens were armed and ready to fight when called upon.

In spite of the best of intentions, Jefferson's two terms in office did not succeed in totally dismantling the standing military. History shows that the harsh realities of politics often detour even the greatest of statesmen.

Despite powerful voices encouraging American involvement in overseas conflicts, Jefferson had fought vociferously to keep America out of Europe's wars during the late 1700s and early 1800s. Nonetheless, those voices were powerful enough to keep the President from totally dismantling the military, particularly the Navy.

America's most strategic seaports were of great concern to many, given the might exhibited by the Spanish and French navies. Thus, there was strong support for a buildup of U.S. navy forces as a showcase to the world, demonstrating America's might.

A compromise was reached between Jefferson and the Navy's supporters when the President agreed to keep a standing Navy provided it would be a much smaller and more efficient one. The Jefferson compromise meant that the nation's coastline would be protected by a fleet of smaller, faster gun-boats, and Congress gave its approval to this plan during Jefferson's second term.

Another motivation for Jefferson's plan to streamline military operations was his belief in small, efficient, and cost-effective central government. Jefferson was a minimalist when it came to central government. Expenditures for the federal government, which included military spending, were cut.

This meant that government was forced to live within its means. Believing that the citizens themselves were responsible for the young nation's defense, Jefferson was committed to scaling back the size and scope of government services. This led to the end of internal taxation entirely during Jefferson's Presidency.

The obvious lessons to be learned from the Jefferson years are of incalculable importance for America today. A return to the core values of Jeffersonian democracy may well save the Republic from falling into a thousand years of darkness.