Women and Children Die First

By Jeannie DeAngelis

American science fiction writer Robert A. Heinlein once said, “Men are expendable; women and children are not. A tribe or a nation can lose a high percentage of its men and still pick up the pieces and go on…as long as the women and children are saved.”

When the Titanic sank in 1912, women on board had a 75% higher chance of survival than men, and children a 52% higher survival rate, because women and children were placed on lifeboats first. In a humane society, “women and children first” is a testimony to the bravery and chivalry of civilized men. Emphasis on the word “civilized.”

For barbarians, the standard is much different. In the past few months, the world has witnessed how cultures rooted in brutal, millennia-old practices treat vulnerable women and, more tragically, innocent children

Last month, Del Awar, aged seven, was taken at dusk from the yard where he was playing. Del was found “hanging in an orchard the following day.”

According to those who “saw his slight body after it was cut down … the bruises and scratches around the young boy’s neck suggested his murder had been neither quick, nor easy.” As punishment for the absurd crime of supposedly being a spy for Hamid Karzai’s government, the Taliban, made up of men, carried out the execution. Taliban militants stood there exacting revenge: laughing, spitting, and smoking small brown cigarettes as a 7 year-old boy, garroted with a noose, strangled to death.

Terrorist-based Islamic cultures that use women and children as human shields give new meaning to the concept of “women and children first.” In Afghanistan, individuals “accused of collaboration” with the NATO forces or with the Karzai government are immediately, and without question, executed. “Schools have been closed or burned for being un-Islamic; schoolgirls have had acid thrown in their faces, and women have been confined to home unless accompanied by a male relative.”

Reeling from the shock of the murder of a little boy in Afghanistan, the world now turns its eyes to a dank, gloomy prison in Tabriz, Iran, where an innocent woman awaits a death sentence. Islamic men grappled for a lifeboat when they strung up a tiny boy in a tree. In Iran, cowards of a similar breed prepare to mercilessly stone a “caring mother” to death.

Question: Does the Obama administration actually believe that these monstrous beasts can, or should, be reasoned with?

While a woman’s life hangs in the balance, rather than condemning these ghastly acts, Obama focuses on integrating Islam and NASA. Obama’s newly appointed NASA administrator Charles Bolden expressed in an Al Jazeera interview that the president feels the space program’s emphasis should be on finding ” a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science … and math and engineering.”

How about if America’s Muslim-friendly president instead denounces Islam’s barbaric practice of stoning women and hanging children?

The woman due to be executed has a name; her name is Sakineh Mohammadie Ashtiani. Sakineh was convicted of adultery while married in 2006, after which she received the punishment of 99 lashes. A kangaroo court, similar to the one that hung a seven-year-old boy for spying, reopened the case because the woman was then suspected of murdering her husband. Sakineh was acquitted of spousal murder.

Acquittal aside, “the adultery charge was reviewed and a death penalty handed down on the basis of ‘judge’s knowledge’ — a loophole that allows for subjective judicial rulings where no conclusive evidence is present.” A subjective ruling without evidence is one of many shining examples of Sharia Law.

Sakineh’s son, Sajjad Mohammedie Ashtiani, maintains that the woman is innocent and has been imprisoned for half a decade “for doing nothing.” Initially, Sakineh was whipped for the crime of adultery. The condemned woman’s son said, “Authorities asked if I wanted to wait outside.” Sajjad chose to be with his mother while Sakineh’s skin was sadistically and systematically peeled away from bone and muscle during a brutal, male-inflicted flogging that even strong men can’t endure.

Half a decade later, young Sajjad may well witness a fate far worse than what his mother experienced five years prior at the end of a whip. If human rights organizations and the world community fail to cry out on the condemned woman’s behalf, or Sajjad’s pleas for pardon to supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini or Judiciary Chairman Sadegh Larijani fall on deaf ears, a desperate son may be forced to watch the woman who raised him suffer an inhumane death by stoning.

What lies ahead for Sakineh? Well, at any moment, a frightened, weary Sakineh could be dragged hysterically from her jail cell through a crowd of hostile, self-righteous men eager to witness the carnage. A hole in the ground awaits Sakineh, sort of a pre-burial burial.

Weak in the knees and trembling with fear, Sakineh will be cruelly shoved into the hole and forced to stand while dirt is slowly returned to it. The woman’s frame will be trapped like an animal, her arms and legs immobilized with just her head sticking up from the hot, sandy soil.

Sajjad, weeping in horror and fear, will likely choose the difficult task of once again remaining at his mother’s side. The young man will be forced to helplessly stand by as the sinful men who dug the hole eagerly jostle to “cast the first stone” at a fragile target.

The stones in the piles destined for Sakineh’s head have been carefully selected to be large enough to inflict severe damage to a woman, but not so large as to instantly take her life. Stones large enough to remove her eyes, repeatedly fracture her skull, and crack her teeth, but small enough to ensure that her death is as slow and painful as the one Del Awar experienced struggling desperately for air against the rope in Sarwan Qala.

Lest the civilized world forget, the goal of terrorism is unbridled fear coupled with excruciating pain as a precursor to unhurried, agonizing death.

Shockingly, American President Barack Obama has yet to publicly condemn blatant human rights violations that are far more pressing than NASA failing to “reach out” and “engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations.” While the ancient practice of stoning and hanging “women and children” continues in real time, Barack Obama places priority on elevating Islamic contributions to math, science, and engineering.

Amidst the president’s endless quest to endear himself to a Muslim world, someone should pull Barack Obama aside and read to him the second half of Robert Heinlein’s poignant quote: “if you fail to save the women and children, you’ve had it, you’re done, you’re through! You join Tyrannosaurus Rex, one more breed that bilged its final test.”

Are You an American, or Do You Just Live Here?

By Heather Carlton

Our country has become a country of Americans and other people who just live here. It pains me because I believe that this will change our nation from greatness to mediocrity.

I saw the flag wave as I stood at attention during the playing of our national anthem. It was simply sublime. I could see the tears well up in the eyes of my brother, a twenty-year Army veteran. I could feel the tears in my own eyes. The song pulled at the heartstrings of every member of our family. But not everyone in the crowd felt that way. Not everyone is moved by the ring of freedom.

There are six children in my family, and four of us have served our country. We have uncles who have served, and my grandfathers served. We have a long history of service. There are few citizens in this country who can’t find a military member in their lineage. I say “citizens” because this is where I will clarify my statements.

People in our families have served and served with pride in their hearts. When the anthem plays, they remember loved ones and friends who died for this great country and feel proud to have known them. They remember that freedom is not free.

When I watch the news and I see that more of our soldiers have died on foreign ground, it chills me to the bone. It causes my heart to ache for the families and loved ones who have sacrificed it all for our freedom. It has been said that our country is great because “all gave some and some gave all.” However, our country is not made up that way anymore.

What has happened to our country? We have become a country of entitlement. Liberals tell us we should allow the illegal immigrants to come here because they are just coming to feed their children, that if you were starving, you would come here, too. They say they are not hurting anyone.

I am here to tell you they are hurting someone. They are hurting us. When Ellis Island was receiving immigrants in record numbers, the people who came to this country came because they wanted to be Americans; they kissed the ground and prayed thanks to God for getting them to this great country and allowing them its vast opportunities. They had to endure great evils and hardships to get here, but they did so happily. They learned our language, and they wanted to assimilate into our culture. They loved America and became Americans.

Now, we are receiving record numbers of illegal immigrants. These people who do not respect our country enough to enter the country properly and legally. They do not care that we have laws, and they bring their own culture here. Many of them do not respect our flag; in fact, they burn it and spit on it in public, periodically. These people are not coming here to be a part of our great country. They want us to learn their language, they want our jobs, and they send money back to support their economy. They do not even plan to assimilate. They will take what they can from our country and leave when it is convenient. These people are weakening our country.

So I say to you: There is a difference between the people who live in America and the people who are Americans. If you are an American, then you should be truly outraged at what is being allowed to happen to our country! You should feel angry over how undeserving people are receiving the freedom and rights that you and your loved ones have fought for and died for. You should feel sad because so many people no longer remember that being an American is really about, and they are all right with settling for just living in America.

Ask yourself. Do I deserve to be here? Do I love this great nation which is unlike any other? Or do I simply reside here? Freedom is not free, and it is not an entitlement. Freedom is ours because of people who loved this country and loved the principles of this country so much that they gave everything they had.

With taxes, less is more

The country can now relax and turn its attention to such trivial concerns as Day 81 of the oil gusher in the Gulf of Mexico and continuing high unemployment and high debt now that LeBron James has finally decided to go with the Miami Heat rather than remain in Cleveland or head for New York or Chicago.

Whatever the stated reasons for his decision, James comes out on top financially even though Miami’s lower offer compared with Cleveland’s higher desperate attempt to retain their star player is actually worth more to him as CNBC’s Darren Rovell explains in LeBron and the Taxman.

Ohio’s and Cleveland’s higher income tax rates (6% and 2% respectively) compared to Florida’s and Miami’s taxes would gobble up the differential between the Cav’s richer offer and the Heat’s (relatively) lesser one. Had James chosen to play with the Knicks in New York, which has the dubious distinction of having both the highest city and state income taxes in the nation,

On a five-year contract worth $96 million — what he’d get from the Knicks or the Heat — LeBron would pay $12.34 million in New York taxes. Quite a penalty for the privilege of working in Midtown

according to a New York Post editorial, blaming their lawmakers for perhaps keeping James out of the city and state because of the high taxes. While taxes may not have been a factor In James’ decision high income and other taxes in New York, Ohio and other tax happy states have definitely pushed companies and high income individuals to pack up and move to friendlier tax regions taking their jobs, their productivity and yes, their taxes with them, proving once again that higher taxes do not automatically produce higher revenue.

Oh, by the way all you concerned liberals, human rights activists, progressives, financial equalizers and others of that ilk:

1) There is a several million dollar and percentage difference between James’ salary package and that of the lowest paid person in the Heat’s stadium; does that matter?

2) The racial, ethnic, gender and physical characteristics of the Miami Heat, especially with the recent additions of James, Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade, do not look like the population of the greater Miami area; does that matter?

The Obama-Pelosi Lame Duck Strategy

By JOHN FUND

Democratic House members are so worried about the fall elections they’re leaving Washington on July 30, a full week earlier than normal—and they won’t return until mid-September. Members gulped when National Journal’s Charlie Cook, the Beltway’s leading political handicapper, predicted last month “the House is gone,” meaning a GOP takeover. He thinks Democrats will hold the Senate, but with a significantly reduced majority.

The rush to recess gives Democrats little time to pass any major laws. That’s why there have been signs in recent weeks that party leaders are planning an ambitious, lame-duck session to muscle through bills in December they don’t want to defend before November. Retiring or defeated members of Congress would then be able to vote for sweeping legislation without any fear of voter retaliation.

“I’ve got lots of things I want to do” in a lame duck, Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D., W. Va.) told reporters in mid June. North Dakota’s Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, wants a lame-duck session to act on the recommendations of President Obama’s deficit commission, which is due to report on Dec. 1. “It could be a huge deal,” he told Roll Call last month. “We could get the country on a sound long-term fiscal path.” By which he undoubtedly means new taxes in exchange for extending some, but not all, of the Bush-era tax reductions that will expire at the end of the year.

In the House, Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, told reporters last month that for bills like “card check”—the measure to curb secret-ballot union elections—”the lame duck would be the last chance, quite honestly, for the foreseeable future.”

Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, chair of the Senate committee overseeing labor issues, told the Bill Press radio show in June that “to those who think [card check] is dead, I say think again.” He told Mr. Press “we’re still trying to maneuver” a way to pass some parts of the bill before the next Congress is sworn in.

Other lame-duck possibilities? Senate ratification of the New Start nuclear treaty, a federally mandated universal voter registration system to override state laws, and a budget resolution to lock in increased agency spending.

Then there is pork. A Senate aide told me that “some of the biggest porkers on both sides of the aisle are leaving office this year, and a lame-duck session would be their last hurrah for spending.” Likely suspects include key members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Congress’s “favor factory,” such as Pennsylvania Democrat Arlen Specter and Utah Republican Bob Bennett.

Conservative groups such as FreedomWorks are alarmed at the potential damage, and they are demanding that everyone in Congress pledge not to take up substantive legislation in a post-election session. “Members of Congress are supposed to represent their constituents, not override them like sore losers in a lame-duck session,” Rep. Tom Price, head of the Republican Study Committee, told me.

It’s been almost 30 years since anything remotely contentious was handled in a lame-duck session, but that doesn’t faze Democrats who have jammed through ObamaCare and are determined to bring the financial system under greater federal control.

Mike Allen of Politico.com reports one reason President Obama failed to mention climate change legislation during his recent, Oval Office speech on the Gulf oil spill was that he wants to pass a modest energy bill this summer, then add carbon taxes or regulations in a conference committee with the House, most likely during a lame-duck session. The result would be a climate bill vastly more ambitious, and costly for American consumers and taxpayers, than moderate “Blue Dogs” in the House would support on the campaign trail. “We have a lot of wiggle room in conference,” a House Democratic aide told the trade publication Environment & Energy Daily last month.

Many Democrats insist there will be no dramatic lame-duck agenda. But a few months ago they also insisted the extraordinary maneuvers used to pass health care wouldn’t be used. Desperate times may be seen as calling for desperate measures, and this November the election results may well make Democrats desperate.

Race and gender employment quotas hidden in financial reform

By: Diana Furchtgott-Roth

Who would have guessed that the Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, scheduled for a vote in the Senate when it returns from recess, imposes race and gender employment quotas on the financial industry — at a time the job market is stalling and economic growth is slowing?

Dodd-Frank’s Section 342 states that race and gender employment ratios must be observed by all government agencies that regulate the financial sector, as well as private financial institutions that do business with the government.

In addition to the bill’s well-publicized plans to establish over a dozen new financial regulatory offices, Section 342 sets up at least 20 Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion in:

>> The 10 Departmental Offices of the Department of the Treasury;

>> The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.;

>> The Federal Housing Finance Agency;

>> The 12 Federal Reserve regional banks;

>> The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve;

>> The National Credit Union Administration;

>> The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency;

>> The Securities and Exchange Commission; and

>> The new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The director and staff of each office are tasked with promoting equal employment opportunities and racial, ethnic, and gender diversity not just in the agency’s work force, but also the work forces of its contractors and subcontractors.

The mission of these federal monitors it is to assure “to the maximum extent possible the fair inclusion” of women and minorities, individually and through businesses they own, in the activities of the agencies, including contracting.

The age-old question, of course, is what’s “fair.”

Under the U.S. Department of Education’s enforcement of Title IX, passed in 1972 as an amendment to the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which pertains to varsity athletic opportunities for male and female undergraduates, “fair” is defined as proportional. If 55 percent of the students are female, then 55 percent of the varsity sports slots have to go to women. The same might be true for financial firms.

Look at Section 342 (d), reproduced above. The “fair” employment test applies to all financial institutions, including brokers and law firms. Contracts are defined as “all contracts,” including those dealing with debt, equities and securities. Federal Reserve regional banks might have to account for race and gender when they issue credit.

Contractors that don’t make a good-faith effort to include women and minorities will be terminated.

According to American Enterprise Institute expert Christina Hoff Sommers, “This is going on everywhere. There are several bills pending in Congress such as Fulfilling the Potential of Women in Science and Engineering, the Paycheck Fairness Act, and now Section 342 of Dodd-Frank, that will empower a network of gender apparatchiks — but weaken critical national institutions.”

Section 342’s provisions will increase cost and inefficiency in federal agencies. Federal agencies will find it easier to employ and contract with less-qualified women and minorities, merely in order to avoid regulatory trouble.

Women and minorities already have a range of legal avenues to ensure that businesses don’t discriminate. By creating these new offices, Congress doesn’t believe existing law is sufficient.

Cabinet-level departments have individual Offices of Civil Rights and Diversity, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Labor Department’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance enforce racial and gender discrimination laws.

With its new Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion, Dodd-Frank is radically changing existing law from anti-discrimination, namely equality of opportunity, to quotas, namely equality of outcome. Ultimately, the only way that financial firms will be able to comply is by showing that a certain percentage of their work force is female or minority.

A change of this magnitude in America’s employment law deserves careful consideration — rather than a few pages hidden in a financial regulation bill.

Dispatch from the Utility Front: ‘Perfect Citizen’

Grant Ellis

The Wall Street Journal has unearthed yet another burgeoning intrusion on America. The program is dubbed “Perfect Citizen”. An interesting name since it appears to say nothing about the program.

The lead line in the article is however fairly revealing:

“The federal government is launching an expansive program dubbed “Perfect Citizen” to detect cyber assaults on private companies and government agencies running such critical infrastructure as the electricity grid and nuclear-power plants, according to people familiar with the program.”

Another quote indicates not everyone is buying the concept:

“The overall purpose of the [program] is our Government…feel[s] that they need to insure the Public Sector is doing all they can to secure Infrastructure critical to our National Security,” said one internal Raytheon email, the text of which was seen by The Wall Street Journal. “Perfect Citizen is Big Brother.”

According to the article, Raytheon (the winner of the $100 million classified contract for “Perfect Citizen”) declined to comment on this e-mail.

I’m willing to concede that intercepting and/or deflecting cyberattacks does seem like a good idea. But the following quote reminds me of the intrusive nature of what is being proposed:

“A U.S. military official called the program long overdue and said any intrusion into privacy is no greater than what the public already endures from traffic cameras.”

Who doesn’t think traffic cameras are intrusive?

Unfortunately, specifics about the program are unavailable at this writing. Here’s why:

“Because the program is still in the early stages, much remains to be worked out, such as which computer control systems will be monitored and how the data will be collected. NSA would likely start with the systems that have the most important security implications if attacked, such as electric, nuclear, and air-traffic-control systems, they said.”

Finally, and most fearful, there’s this:

“While the government can’t force companies to work with it, it can provide incentives to urge them to cooperate, particularly if the government already buys services from that company, officials said.”

Governmental coercion plus governmental intrusion. What could possible go wrong?

As the saying goes, “Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean people aren’t actually out to get you.”

Chris Lewis, Once Again, trying to Defy the Odds and Represent the People

In 1998, Chris Lewis ran for Wicomico County Council (District 1) after graduating from Salisbury University. instead of choosing a party, he stayed true to his roots and ran as unaffiliated. In order to do so, he had to collect signatures to even be able to get on the ballot. Defying the odds, he was able to collect more than enough signatures and got his name on the ballot. he ran against Ed Taylor that year. Unfortunately, he lost. However, valuable lessons were learned.

In 2009, Chris helped to organize the first Tea Party here in Salisbury, Maryland. That first Tea party was the first taste of politics for many here on the Eastern Shore. The power of the Tea Party was that it was made up of regular Americans who helped build this society and who help bring prosperity to Maryland and the country. Grassroots is just not a term pundits use, and yet, it is much more than just a movement. A Grassroots campaign is how he plans on winning, while keeping costs down. Chris Lewis believes in the revitalization of America, and where better to start than on the Wicomico County Council here on the beautiful Eastern Shore of Maryland.

Once again, Chris Lewis, is running for Wicomico County Council. This time he is running At Large as a Conservative Republican. The main reason he is not running as unaffiliated is time restraints. However, he remains a staunch conservative who believes in representation, not the establishment. He believes in principle over party.

How many people can say their lives are better now than they were 4 years ago? How much of that has to do with the federal government and how much has to do with local government? Will voting the same people in change things for the better? Have things like the local economy, government spending, and crime gotten worse while these elected officials have been in office?

It is time for government to once again represent the people, not pander to them for the sole purpose of getting votes.

By Authority of Ralph Cordrey, treasurer

Learn More here and Listen to Jimi Hendrix in the background.

*We have learned the picture on the main page will be changed shortly to something more professional. Question, does a real working man’s candidate need a professional picture?