White House Czars will not testify

The White House has said "NO" to Congress questioning many of President Obamas' Czars. "These are men and women who are not just advising the President, but they are "actually making policy or negotiating on behalf of Mr. Obama." The argument stems from the fact that President Obama feels he should have "advisors that aren't subject to reproach, or fear of being called to testify." One of the root causes for Congress to request the "czars" be questioned is Carol Browner, the energy and environment czar, who has successfully negotiated and instituted new policies without consulting congress.

There were 18 positions that were created by President Obama, and filled by 18 unelected officials since he took office, and 8 (the untouchables), according to the White House are not "subject to Freedom of Information Act requests or requests for testimonies." The administration claimed that these positions are totally advisory and have no independent authority. If that is the case, then how are policies getting created without the knowledgeable consent of Congress.

This is just another example of an administration acting independently without approval or oversight from a panel of their peers. Accountability is not a strong character trait right now for this administration, as President Obama has stated, "we inherited this" referring to the national debt. As if he didn't know what he was stepping into. He wanted the position. He ran for office, and the people got their king. President Obama does have his work cut out for him, no doubt. To my knowledge, he is the only President in history to inherit a war, and the scale of debt this country has. He can blame George Bush all he wants, but the fact remains that this current administration has ordered more spending in 100 days in office then Bush did in 8 years. That being said, their argument for that is that they are having to increase and accelerate spending so much just to fix the problem inherited by the previous administration, which is a half truth.

Many of the questionable financial decisions that George Bush, and his administration made were approved by senate and congress with then Senator Barack Obama's approval signed on the dotted line along with the "ignorant" Republicans. Do you know why that never comes out in the wash most times? This President and his administration are all about Change, transforming America, moving forward, and not living in the past.

It has been quite impressive to watch how they have handled the flip-flopping of policies, actions and directions taken by this administration. Also how he has come to the defense of his administration when it comes to free press is very sly, and carefully executed as not to appear biased, or opinionated. They definitely know how to smooth things over and remain calm while doing it. They will only get more efficient at these justifications as the months roll on. It is just another classic example of circular reasoning and passing the buck, which many politicians on both sides have implemented in previous years. This tactic may work for now, maybe even for a few years. But at some point, America is going to want to see some fruit from all the hype.

Free Press?

Finally, other news networks saw the game that was being run on FNC. The White House had attempted to bar FNC from being a part of the press pool that has been comprised of the 5 major news networks. FOX, being the highest rated. These 5 major networks have been together in he pool for years, so when a senior official, Kenneth Fienberg, attempted to deny them entrance, it seems the spirit of journalistic brotherhood kicked in. It's great to see, the other networks be so politically uncorrect, it is no secret that they pretty much whole heartedly disagree with FOX. The other networks collectively agreed that "spanking" FOX is against everything "freedom of press" is about.

It seems that after the near threats over the past month from the Obama Administration even the "other" side is seeing some discouraging things. Senior Advisor David Axelrod told ABC news that; "Fox is not a real news organization and other networks "ought not treat them that way."

Honestly, I am amazed it took this long. It was pretty gutsy for this administration to be so bold as to nearly violate the Constitution by restricting access to one particular network because they disagree with them. President Barack Obama defended the actions of his adviser's citing that the FNC is possibly operating as a "talk radio format then that's one thing. And if it's operating as a news outlet, then that is another. But it's not something I am losing sleep over it." There are 23 shows on the FNC, and only 4 of them to my knowledge could be classified as a "talk radio" format. Journalism is very much alive at FOX.

The real issue is controlling the media, which I commented on in "Quotes from our Nations Leaders". Anita Dunn, the COMMUNICATIONS director made it very clear that they WANT to handle the news organizations. President Obama had this to say about opposition to his agenda.

"I want everybody to know we believe in a strong and loyal opposition. I believe in a two-party system where ideas are tested and assumptions are challenged -- because that’s how we can move this country forward. But what I reject is when some folks decide to sit on the sidelines and root for failure on health care or on energy or on our economy. What I reject is when some folks say we should go back to the past policies when it was those very same policies that got us into this mess in the first place."

Interesting that when they receive "strong" opposition, and their "assumptions" are challenged, they try to gag, and blindfold the source. So which is it, do you truly accept opposition and someone questioning your "assumptions". So what if it's a talk radio format, that has no bearing on truth. In the late 1700's it was pamphleteers who were considered radicals who opposed government, you know, men like the "blackguard" Thomas Paine, Patrick Henry, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, etc. The times have changed, and now, with the age of the Internet, practically any American can display his voice and his two cents when dealing with current affairs. It's quite liberating. That is why the New York Times, and the Washington Post are going broke. That is why nightly news on ABC, CBS, and NBC has fallen flat over the last 10 years.

President Obama also said regarding FOX news, "the American people are a lot more interested in what we're doing to create jobs or how we're handling the situation in Afghanistan."

That is in fact a concern for most Americans, no doubt. Our soldiers at war, and 15 million people out of work are major concerns to Americans. However large those problems may be, they do not compare to the attacks against real Constitutional rights such as freedom of press. Would the American Revolution have been as successful as it was without the press and pamphleteers of the day? Nothing, in my estimation, is more important right now, under this administration then making sure our freedoms are secured for our children in future generations. The people are responsible for who is in office. Let us not forget that our taxes pay their checks, and they are public servants to the people. It is a sacred office, and Americans should not just allow things to occur do to naivety. How many scandals in the political offices have we seen just in the last 2 years alone? Both parties have their bad apples.

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never can be.”

Thomas Jefferson

Quotes from our Nations Political Fathers

This is meant to show a general parallel between the overall mindset and character of our political leaders of today, and those of the American Revolution.

A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicity. Thomas Jefferson, First Inaugural Address.

Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams

The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government.

Patrick Henry

"... God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure. Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 (C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950)

We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution. Abraham Lincoln

This is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle becomes a precedent for a second; that second for a third; and so on, till the bulk of society is reduced to mere automatons of misery, to have no sensibilities left but for sinning and suffering... And the fore horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in its train wretchedness and oppression. Thomas Jefferson

The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed and that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of press. Thomas Jefferson

Qoutes from our Nations Political Leaders

Barack Obama - President of the United States

"Democrats are an opinionated bunch. You know the other side, they just kind of do what they’re told. Democrats, ya’ll thinkin’ for yourselves. I like that in you"

Imagine if the situation were reversed and George W. Bush called all democrats brain dead zombies who can't think for themselves. That is essentially what was said about 55 million Republicans.

Ron Bloom - Manufacturing Policy Advisor

"Generally speaking we get the joke. We know that the free market is nonsense. We know that the whole point is to game the system, to beat the market, or at least find someone who will pay you a lot of money because they're convinced that there is a free lunch. We know this is largely about power, that it's an adults only, no limit game. We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. And we get it that if you want a friend, you should get a dog."

Insinuating that the government is not your friend, and they now know what's best for you. It's comparable to what late night talk show host Bill Maher said about dragging 60% of the Christians to evolution because they are stupid, and they have to be forced to believe certain things. He was referencing the healthcare bill how we should not have a choice, we should just be made to accept it.

Ron bloom goes on to tell us what he believes government is; "political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun. Why would any political figure hold to agreeing with a man who was responsible for 70 million deaths. Why would you open yourself up for criticism unless you believe it.

Maxine Waters - Democrat, California Representative

This frightening statement was directed towards John Hofmiester, the Shell Oil president, and 5 other oil company presidents, during a house hearing. As seen on the video, this was clearly a slip of the tongue for the administration. You can see other representatives fidgeting about in their seats. "out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh"

"Guess what this liberal will be all about, this liberal will be all about socializing... and... be about... basically taking over, and the government running all of your companies."

Dalia Mogahed - White House Advisor, Advisory Council/Faith Based Partnerships

"the critical issue today is finding ways to integrate sharia and state law in Muslim-majority countries."

This is the same woman who attends functions with known supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, a global mix of Muslims all over the world that has had repeated terrorist ties in recent years. It's intersting how Sharia law condemns homosexuality, and is punishable by death, but this administration embraces change and the advancement of homosexuality. If your interested in some intriguing facts about Sharia law, check out the link. These laws should not be embraced by any country.

Anita Dunn - White House Communications Director

The same Anita Dunn who was qouted to say that her prefered philosopher is Mao Tse Tung, which she now claims was meant to be a ironic joke.

"Fox News often operates almost as either the research arm or the communications arm of the Republican Party...Let's not pretend they're a news network the way CNN is."

"a huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it, what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying; "A huge part of our press strategy was focused on making the media cover what Obama was actually saying as opposed to why the campaign was saying it."what the tactic was. … Making the press cover what we were saying."

I am not a registered donkey or elephant, nor a huge FOX news watcher, but if I feel like watching the news, and that is a big if, I will watch the FNC. You know why they are attempting to discredit FNC, because Americans are not only watching it more than any other network, prime time or day time, they are listening as well. Thats why President Barack Obama's approval rating for his 3rd quarter in office hit a record low. America is watching and reading new material. Men like Glenn Beck, and Mark Levine (not a big fan, but he has great material) have been dominating the New York Times Best sellers list for months. People are no longer looking for the horse trough style news where they have been told what to believe. That has now been replaced for truth. People just want truth. It has become 100 times more relative in these days. They are tired of being lied to by politicians (both parties). Over 2,500,000 viewers watch FOX news every night, and the only one remotely close to second is MSNBC at 861,000. CNN, NBC, and HLN are not even close. So don't believe the propaganda. FNC viewers, a large percentage of them anyways, are comprised of men and women with values, principles, ethics, and morals. You can't blame the viewers for simply gravitating to what they are.

80 million for artistic expression

This is old news, but I noticed that I had forgotten about it. At the time of the article, nearly 50 members of Congress were fighting fervently against this stimulus grant. One hundred thousand has already gone to some "risque art houses". Details of these houses in short include "kinky art porno horror films, men, women, and one gorilla, and a weekly production entitled "Perverts Put Out" (the long running production that invites guest to "join your fellow pervs for some explicit, twisted fun.") We could barely afford my sons birthday party this year in this economy, and then to read an article about the NEA receiving federal money (link PG-13) to allow furtherance of "artistic views" no matter how twisted, can be very frustrating. I can't even believe this stuff anymore, but at the same time, should I really be surprised given current events of the last 15 years? How is giving these 3 groups millions of dollars fiscally responsible? Do you know what we do in our house if we don't have the money? Nothing. What a slap in the face to Americans, 15 million now without work, just getting by, losing their homes, automobiles, etc, and we give 80 million dollars for "art". Maybe there is just something us ("dumb Americans" Bill Maher's thoughts) can't fathom about all this.

Considering the trillions of dollars of debt this nation is in, to even discuss the topic of irresponsibly giving millions of dollars out in the name of "freedom of expression" is bordering on insanity. That phrase never shows up in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or the Declaration of Independence. It has been tacked or invented to make allowance for the nations' degenerates. Washington elites, instead of reading it, have become accustomed to "interpreting" the Constitution and other documents to fit their own preferences, and many Americans have followed suit.

Freedom of expression? Certainly those 3 words could cover anything and everything imaginable and conceivable in a mind, and in a body (given the context). So anyone who wants to exercise their "right" can delve into the dark recesses of immorality, blasphemous and detestable displays of religious figures, carnality, self indulgence, and pornographic material or art. These citizens not only act out their abominable desires, but can also receive funding for it, and protection from the same document that grant us freedom to worship as one nation under God. I'm not gonna beat a herd of dead horses but a man photographing or filming explicit images of underage girls is not covered under "freedom of expression". Nor does a "shock-jock" on Sirius Radio talking about every kind of deviant sexual act in great detail fall under the protection of the Bill of Rights because of it's abhorrent and carnal nature. The founding fathers would have never even considered such a notion due to the explicitness of the subject matter. And the man or woman guilty of commiting such contemptible speech would have been flogged, tarred and feathered, and most likely cut off from society and run out of town.

I love paying taxes...

"To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical" - Thomas Jefferson

Charlatan Benny Hinn faces Senate

Benny Hinn has long been a nuisance to me for several reasons. The first nuisance is that of dealing with his supporters, who use experiences, and feelings to defend his antics instead of the scriptures. The second is actually hearing the lies this man spews. He told me to get close to the TV one day so he could blow the Holy Spirit on me. He also told me that if I sent him $30 dollars, he would send me a personalized "holy handkerchief" that has been anointed and will bring you great success monetarily. For the sake of the unbeliever, I wish I was kidding about this buffoon. England won't even let this man in. They consider him a religious extremist. Hilarious!

He gets away with it because of the ignorance of the nation when it comes to biblical matters. The man is no doubt a charlatan, and a hireling. I remember watching this creep when I was in Bible college thinking, do people really believe this guy. Millions of people flock to this man in hopes that he can heal their ailments or that they can see some great thing from God. Ever since the creation of time there have always been men who take advantage of the simple masses by citing divination (as Binny Hinn claims). By "simple", I am not meaning stupid, but rather naive. Benny Hinn is no different than the religious war-lords that use religion for financial gain, he just steals money with a smile and a napkin instead of a machete and ransomed food.

His ministries are reported to take 100 million a year, and that's what has Senator Charles Grassley of Iowa has contention with. He and the Senate Finance Committee has launched a full investigation into Hinn's and 5 other megachurches to see if they are "using their tax-exempt status to further God's work, or to fund their own luxuries like mansions, expensive cars and private jets." They are also asking for proof of actual healing from the "Holy Spirit Miracle Crusades", because he has taken money, and gifts, and centered his entire ministry (which he has) on his ability to heal the blind, and to make the crippled walk. The self-proclaimed "little messiah" has been asked to provide documentation and verification that the people who actually attend his crusades are actually sick or suffering from infirmities in the first place. What a reproach this man has been for years! It makes me physically sick knowing that my pastor works 2 to 3 jobs, pastors 2 churches (on Sundays he preaches at both on the same day), and manages to take car of his wife and 9 kids. And this lug nut is out there telling people that "poverty is of the devil", and God wants "all Christians to be prosperous" while he is globe trotting in his private jet.

There haven't been many details released by the committee, but it's good to know we are using those tax dollars to investigate scam artists, and con men. There are no more contemptible or deplorable men then those who would use the name of God, the Bible, or Jesus Christ to embezzle or commit fraud. The summation of Benny Hinn and his crusades are nothing more than large-scale confidence scams that rake in 100 million a year to provide these "quacks" mansions, extravagant cars, luxurious private jets (1.5 million a year to operate), and a parsonage (if you can call his new 10 million dollar mansion on the Pacific coast, 7200 square feet, 7 bedrooms, and a 5 car garage home a parsonage, knock yourself out).

Mountebank - "One who mounts a bench or state in the market or other public place, boast of his skill in curing diseases, vends medicines which he pretends are infallible remedies, and thus deludes the ignorant multitude. Persons of this character may be indicted and punished. Any boastful and false pretender." - Websters, 1828

"Organized religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool."

President Obama wins Nobel peace prize...?

I thought it was an error when I read the news this morning that our 44th President became only the 3rd standing President to win the Nobel Peace prize for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples." It was not over general dislike or overall disapproval of the current administration that I was surprised, but rather lack of evidence to suggest that he has in fact done what the Nobel committee said he had who cast the votes to win him the award. I was, however, impressed with how President Barack Obama down played his unusual winning of the Nobel peace prize. He himself knows that he is undeserving, but of course, who expects him to turn it down along with its 1.4 million that comes with the medal. President Obama said, "I will accept the award as a call to action". He said this, because he knows he hasn't done anything to merit such a prestigious award, and he needs to be busy in following through. Not to minimize our Presidents' past accomplishments as a politician and 8 year Senator but he himself also said:

"I do not deserve to be in the company of so many transformative figures that have been honored by this prize."

Here is the thing that is troubling me, that President Obama was chosen for this award just two weeks after he was elected into office. That fact is left out of many articles I have sourced. This unprecedented nomination is similar to a participation trophy for the losing team at a middle school soccer game. Imagine a valedictorian receiving a degree from a college that he or she never attended. You're all winners! Let's celebrate change! Celebrate mediocrity! Its obvious this was because of his massive popularity than his policy, at home and abroad.

The relevance that he won the prize is entirely depending on how you look at the credibility of the Nobel Peace Prize where it stands in 2009. It's interesting to compare the winners of the prize (judge for yourself) in this decade as opposed to previous decades. The only 2 standing presidents to win the prize before President Obama are Woodrow Wilson, and Teddy Roosevelt (thanks for that income tax). Let's also not forget other notables that have won the prize, which include, Yassur Arafat, the Egyptian-born Palestinian, (seriously, do the words Peace Prize mesh well with the Palestinian Liberation Front?) the earth-saving senator Al Gore, and the anti-Semitic, racial instigator Jimmy Carter. The Nobel committee, comprised of 205 members this year have obviously not considered accomplishments and qualifications, but political correctness. The efforts of Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr. have raised over 1 billion in world aid, and we give these types of awards to the afore mentioned men? That's about par for the course.

It's all about control

The government for some time now, both parties, are more frequently clamping down control on parents' rights when it comes to their children. From the homosexual propaganda, and the humanistic "hope in Obama" cheers that are becoming more common in American class rooms, it's no wonder this generation has a massive up-hill battle to climb.

The Michigan Department of Human Services, backed up by the state, are making a point to let parents know they can no longer babysit. What business does the state have saying a children can't wait at a different mothers' house for a school bus? This woman spoken of in the article was watching 3 other children for neighborhood moms for under an hour before they left for school. This woman has lived in this neighborhood for 35 years. Keep in mind that we are talking about Michigan too, the worst state in America as far as the economy. We don't send our kids to daycare for obvious reasons, but also for the monetary reasons. Day cares can run anywhere from $3,000 to $15,000 a month.

Furthermore, the fact that this complaint came from a neighbor is concerning. You know the type. They sit at home all day until the sun warms their feet; they peer out of their caves like vampires finding fault in everyone else; they act appalled that someone wouldn't put their kids in the trusted daycare system; they consider it their civil duty to stick their nose where it doesn't belong.

What happen to helping out fellow man? Why are Americans being restricted when it comes to simple "neighborhood" issues? It all comes back to control. In case you haven't noticed, the government sure seems content on not wanting you to educate, teach, or discipline your own children, so why should someone else's children be any different?

There are 3 children that are not in day care, and that is the root issue. As mentioned in the article this woman is enabling her neighbors to both work, just to get by. Now, her neighbors have to seek alternative means for their children's welfare for a short time only, on school days only.

I'm not saying that all day cares are wicked institutions for evil doers to indoctrinate children, but I'm also not naive enough to think it isn't happening. Anyone with any sense of current events in this country knows this to be true, whether it is daycare, kindergarten, grade school to high schools. The children are being educated out of any belief in God, and the basic core values that tell us right from wrong. Trust in man (as portrayed in the grade school "Change" video and the Hollywood pledge) which included these words "I pledge to be of service to Barrack Obama". On September 8th, the current administration sent out lesson plans to the all schools in America; teacher were to follow the plan and discuss Barrack Obama, and introduce him by way of books and other material. Grade school people! It's as if the children don't have a choice. They are bombarded with agendas and propaganda as soon as they hit the school system.

If the state or the federal government has more control, the more agenda-related filth they can filter into the school system. It is all tied in, and it is definitely a coordinated effort to push the equality issue when it comes to gay children and students. In the news nearly everyday in California, along with several other states, is the gay-rights issue (total protection) and the public school system. It has become frightening to live in California right now because there are laws (SB 777) on the books that dictate when and what children will be introduced to as far as alternative sexuality, in some cases as low as kindergarten. In this bill, it totally redefines what gender and sex are. This is a active law. And in the same bill, if you discriminate in any way, the book will be thrown at you.

This is happening before our eyes in America, and it is occurring all over the nation. From the control, to the indoctrination of our youth, to the propaganda. As I have said before, if they want to live in that state of perversion in America, they unfortunately have that freedom. If they want to live in this country, and take advantage of the freedom all Americans have, again, I'm ok with that. What you shouldn't have the freedom to do, along with anyone, is introduce that which is against nature to a young mind. They attack the basic fundamental foundations of this country, and aggressively go after laws and bills that introduce perversion to school children just because they think everyone should have the chance to be like them.

I don't know how much more clearer I can be about this one specific point about the homosexual movement, primarily the LGBT, and their constituents; they are aggressively, discretely, and effectively reaching our children, not adults, but OUR kids, with their "lifestyle". And the state telling an American mom she can't babysit 3 children for 30 minutes while they wait for a bus while the current administration is supporting and pushing policy that would have state licensed teachers, male and female, teach our grade school children the sensitive matters of the penguins and the bees. (see Penguins and Perversion)

The Dignity for "all" Students???

Back when I went to school, bullying was a big deal then too. I can remember several times getting bullied, or pushed around because of various reasons. Did I bring legal action against the school district, or did my parents go to the courthouse in my defense? On the contrary, it usually ended with me getting beat up by 2 or 4 jocks (I was a punk skater), me putting some toilet paper up my nose to stop the bleeding, and going back to class so my friends could laugh at me. Is there a problem with bullying today? Yes, and there always will be. Is that the real reason all these pro-gay acts and policies are being created? Absolutely not.

The Dignity for all Students Act is written for all children, is active in 11 states, and there are more states to come. It is used primarily to protect gay students in our school systems. This act is posted on several pro-gay websites as well. It is created exclusively for gay rights and this fact can be seen simply by reading it. "All private schools, including religious schools, are explicitly exempt from the law. The bill neither pressures private religious schools to promote homosexuality." Why would they feel the need to say that, if that isn't exactly what they are doing, promoting homosexuality?

This is a day and age where children are given the same prescription medication for their woes in grade school as an adult does. We are teaching our children to seek bail-out from the courts and resort to chemical dependency rather than face adversity. I am not for any child being picked on, bullied, or called derogatory names for any reason, and I believe ALL children should be protected. It is as fundamental as it gets. They are defenseless in most cases and they are our future. The link above takes you to a description of the act, and why it is believed that it is necessary. In the description, it states:

"to prohibit harassment against students in school, including harassment based on real or perceived race, color, weight, national origin, ethnic group, religion, religious practice, disability, sexual orientation, gender (including gender identity and expression) and sex, and to prohibit discrimination based on these same characteristics. The prohibition would apply to all public schools in the state."

That seems pretty fair across the board right? Immediately after this paragraph there is a section that says, "Why is it necessary." And this is where we see the true agenda:

"Schools are places where students should concentrate on learning and personal growth, not on avoiding taunting or violence. All students are negatively affected by bias harassment, but gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) students and those perceived to be LGBT in particular are the victims of severe and widespread discrimination and harassment in our public schools."

This is why they want this in schools, so the children who are jumping on the gay and bi-sexual bandwagon, or the transgendered trendy train, can have full protection to develop themselves into a gay and lesbian adult.

Since this bill has been active there have been numerous court cases involving gay students who felt they were being bullied or treated unfairly because some one called them names. There are instances where a student received $25,000 in August of this year. A Kansas youth in 2005 won $445,000 citing the same bill. Should we teach our children that if someone calls them a name, they can sue and get paid? Is that the message we are sending? I am not arguing whether their "rights" have been violated, I am arguing that they are not the real minority in public schools as they claim to be, and there is a very real double standard along these lines when dealing with students who claim to believe in Christ.

In 2009, you can't shut down or even bring into question ONE single gay and lesbian group, in any high school in America. If you do, the wrath of the ACLU and the LGBT will come down on that school district like an anvil.

In our American towns we have come so far. Now teachers are not even allowing kids to read a Bible in schools or have a book cover with the Ten Commandments on it, and teachers are calling the Bible "garbage".

Children can't even bring a Bible in for show and tell in Kindergarten, but a student can write and present a book report on Harvey Milk. What scary, dark, dreaded, hate-mongering, gay-bashing, fearful passage was going to be read? Just Psalms 118. The 3rd Circuit Court Judge Anthony Scirica who rejected the mothers claim for suit said this:

"parents of public school kindergarten students may reasonably expect their children will not become captive audiences to an adult's reading of religious texts...School officials have the RIGHT to require that parents refrain from promoting specific messages in class."

"Captive audiences"? "Specific messages"? What do you think the children in the Almeda school district have to do in kindergarten through 5th grade? They are held captive to hear a very specific message from LGBT propaganda every year, once a year, for 5 years, and no, they cannot opt out of it. These issues should not even be discussed among children. What business does anyone have, even a parent, discussing such strong sexually contrived dialogue with a 4-9 year old (Kindergarten - Fifth grade)? It's just not age-appropriate.

The school districts won't have Gideons leaving bibles, but they welcome discussion, support groups, and textbooks dealing with Transgender, Homosexual, and Lesbian matters. How is this double standard tolerated? I almost wouldn't be upset if Christians, and even Catholics were allowed to believe what they want without fear of ridicule, but that isn't the case. They are being silenced.

A Catholic girl was told to stop wearing her half inch crucifix necklace because it posed a health and safety risk in the same school where Muslims and similar religions can wear headscarves, sikh, bangles, and turbans.

A Christian student in a New York school district in Long Island, in the very same state that the "Dignity for all Students" act was introduced, was told her Bible study group was not recognized. The student then took action, the school settled the court cost, after the suit, she was awarded $1.

Who is the minority now?