S

o it’s a mixed message from Donald Trump this morning:  Carrie Prejean can keep her Miss California crown despite speaking her mind on gay marriage … and also despite posing for photos wearing nothing but wee bits of underwear while a teen.

Trump, then, came down on the side of true free speech in realizing that reflecting the views of a majority of Americans - even if they are reprehensible to Hollywood and the radical gay lobby - is not grounds for losing a beauty pageant crown. Let’s hope that was an easy decision for him; it certainly should have been.

The second part of the decision - dealing with the photos - is more problematic.  It would be nice if beauty queens and the girls that for whatever reasons see them as role models could look upon nude and semi-nude modeling as a categorical non-starter, and stripping (to use the word) Prejean of her crown for the photos would have sent that meessage.  But Trump recoginzed that in this liberal era, he could hardly recognize her real First Amendment rights (speech) and deny her phony First Amendment rights (expressing herself by posing without much on).

Tweeter pinkelephantpun passed along this re-tweet today, which pretty much sums up the left’s viewpoint of the matter:

RT @BiasedGirl Tolerant Lib of the Day: RT @ian_roberson: I really hate Miss California, I hope that bitch loses her crown and goes to hell!

Shall we discuss the relative prospects for Hell-going?

T

he gross intolerance of those who demand tolerance was on display this week in Sacramento as fallout from the passage of Prop 8 - California’s gay marriage ban - continued, showing gay activists to be … what’s the word they’d use? … heterophobic.

More than 100 people gathered outside the Music Circus today to support Scott Eckern, the theater director who resigned amid controversy over his donation to support the ban on same-sex marriage.

Carrying signs that read “You Made a Circus Out of Freedom” and “A Sad Day for Sacramento Theater,” supporters from throughout the region showed up for the hastily arranged rally.

Many of those gathered say Eckern was treated unfairly.

“This is a witch-hunt,” said Lance Christensen, who says he’s a regular patron of the theater and took off work to show his support for Eckern. “This man has devoted 25 years of his life to theater in Sacramento.”

Eckern resigned from his post as artistic director of the California Musical Theater this morning after harsh reaction to news he donated $1,000 to the campaign to support Proposition 8. (SacBee, emphasis added)

What a bunch of pathetic hypocrites, demanding freedom for themselves while denying it to others. Have brown shirts become standard issue for gays now?

H

eaven forbid that schools should have a caring environment.

No, scratch that.  Whatever forbid that schools should have a caring environment.  There, that’s suitably secular for this story from the crumbling edges of our civilization.  And the story is just the start of the story; bear with me.

The Freedom from Religion Foundation is bringing a lawsuit against the Cherry Creek schools in Denver because some of the principles taught in the district’s “40 Developmental Assets” program allegedly are drawn from biblical teachings.

For example, Asset 5 in the program, a “caring school climate,” allegedly is related by the institute to the teaching in the New Testament book of Mark, which says, “Whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name, welcomes me,” according to a report in the Denver Post.

The program also recommends students spend an hour or more a week in a religious community, and the complaint alleges that is using tax money to promote religion, the report said.

The foundation, based in Madison, Wis., said in an amended complaint in federal court in Denver it has evidence the Cherry Creek program, developed by the Search Institute, is linked to the Bible. (WND)

The Cherry Creek program has been using Search Institute materials for 15 years, not as curricula but “a behavioral framework” promoted by the schools.  Search the Search Institute’s mission page and you have to look very hard to find a reference to religion on it (the word “congregation” appears once), although its history page reveals it started over 50 years ago as a Luthern program.  This is a program that’s sufficiently un-overt to fit in America’s secular classrooms.

Have we come to the point where merely being “linked to the Bible” is enough to trash something?  Are we now at the place where the suspicion that Search Institute’s core beliefs are Judeo-Christian, even if there aren’t Bible verses all over their stuff,  alone is sufficient to fire up the book-burning machine?

America just happens to be “linked to the Bible” (here, for example), so what are we supposed to do to please/appease the tiny number of crackpots at the Freedom from Religion Foundation, aka the Whining Shrilly That Most People Don’t Believe What I Believe Foundation?  Toss in the towel and become secular fodder for Islamists, like Europe?

Well, before we accept that end, perhaps it’s worthwhile to scan down to the bottom of this article and see what’s going on in schools in the vicinity, since WND’s Web site happily puts together links to related stories; in this case, stories on education:

Teacher falsely tells kids they have fatal disease

Campaign launched to liberate ’speling’

Student says ‘F— off!’ on test, gets better grade

Today’s class: Hating Jews 101

Bilingual, pro-American book ‘unfit’ for L.A. schools

Female teacher arrest for 9 flings with student

6th-grade survey: Classmate most likely to get pregnant

3rd-graders asked to help classmate in gender change

Children’s hospital launches sex change for kids program

Voting rights challenged in ‘coed showers’ lawsuit

Lord help us!  If we want more of these kinds of terrible goings-on where we educate our precious children, then yes, let’s continue un-linking America from the Bible!

hat-tip: Jim

Cloward-Piven, Obama And The Fall Of America

J

ust drop everything and click on over to American Thinker and James Simpson’s Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis.

The article delves into the Cloward-Piven strategy, spawned in 1966 by two radical socialist professors from Columbia University, Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The strategy was promptly - and accurately - described in The Nation, a publication that would like to put an end to our nation:

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis. The “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

The strategy’s first big success came in 1975, when New York City was forced into bankruptcy by Cloward-Piven acolytes who stormed welfare offices demanding their “rights,” quickly overburdening the welfare system. Simpson makes the point that the current financial crisis appears to be a classic Cloward-Piven strategy, this time with the poor and underqualified demanding their “right” to homownership.

There are so many hard-left radicals linked in the article that at times it seems you’re reading more blue type than black - and all these names link ultimately to one Barack Hussein Obama:

As Simpson says:

The chart puts Barack Obama at the epicenter of an incestuous stew of American radical leftism. Not only are his connections significant, they practically define who he is. Taken together, they constitute a who’s who of the American radical left, and guiding all is the Cloward-Piven strategy.

Conspicuous in their absence are any connections at all with any other group, moderate, or even mildly leftist. They are all radicals, firmly bedded in the anti-American, communist, socialist, radical leftist mesh.

Remember “Obama, the empty suit?” This article shows that the suit Obama wears is not empty; rather, it is a Trojan horse, filled with the most vile ideas about - and plans for - America.

Don’t believe it? Well, what if we told you that the Dems want to set up the financial bailout so radical left wing groups like Acorn get any funds generated through bailout paybacks? It’s true.

hat-tip: Okie on the Lam

I

‘m all for John McCain’s proposal to unleash the Treasury in support of nuclear power, but anyone in the development business knows it may fall flat unless he unleashes the Department of Justice as well. If you haven’t been keeping up on your Waste News reading (registration required - DRAT!), you may not know the latest in the nuke-building wars. Here’s the story:

Alternative Energy Holdings Inc., which has proposed to build a nuclear power plant in southwestern Idaho, is suing an environmental group for making defamatory remarks.

The Boise, Idaho-based company filed the lawsuit in Idaho’s 4th District Court after the Snake River Alliance called the company “scammers.” The comments, broadcast Aug. 11, defame the company and its stockholders, said Donald Gillispie, president and CEO of AEHI. The company has passesd two independent financial audits, which have found nothing amiss, he said.

“These radical groups are allowed to make almost any claim they wish, regardless of the facts, and the media rarely questions [sic] them,” Gillispie said. “Someone has to hold them accountable.”

Indeed, someone should hold them accountable, with one of those Indonesian canes, if possible. But if litigation’s the preferred approach, just don’t do it in California. Suing a lie-spewing whacko in California can get you in big trouble because of legislation prohibiting or limiting SLAPP lawsuits (that’s Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation for the unitiated). A stupid-a$$ law if ever there was one, it’s used by Greenies, NIMBYs and other loud-mouthed fact-fabricators to keep those they abuse from using the courts against them.

In other words, in the eyes of California’s crazy, liberal legislature, some people have more First Amendment freedoms than others. The key word is “liberal.”

W

riting on another subject entirely, a friend sent me this email today:

Overall, though, I think things are moving in the wrong direction.

Unfortunately, 9/11 accelerated the process. Q: Is this what Osama wanted, to move the (self-inflicted) erosion of our freedoms along even faster? That has been suggested before; maybe that is part of what he wanted.

He was talking about the Patriot Act. Show me where that act has infringed on the rights of normal Joes … but that’s not my subject.  Rather, it’s something much more insidious and too much beyond our control: The pressure Islam is putting on our institutions, causing the foundations of our freedom to crumble.

Here’s what I’m talking about:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Publisher Random House has pulled a novel about the Prophet Mohammed’s child bride, fearing it could “incite acts of violence.”

“The Jewel of Medina,” a debut novel by journalist Sherry Jones, 46, was due to be published on August 12 by Random House, a unit of Bertelsmann AG, and an eight-city publicity tour had been scheduled, Jones told Reuters on Thursday.

The novel traces the life of A’isha from her engagement to Mohammed, when she was six, until the prophet’s death. Jones said that she was shocked to learn in May, that publication would be postponed indefinitely.

“I have deliberately and consciously written respectfully about Islam and Mohammed … I envisioned that my book would be a bridge-builder,” said Jones.

Random House deputy publisher Thomas Perry said in a statement the company received “cautionary advice not only that the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community, but also that it could incite acts of violence by a small, radical segment.”

“In this instance we decided, after much deliberation, to postpone publication for the safety of the author, employees of Random House, booksellers and anyone else who would be involved in distribution and sale of the novel,” Perry said.

America can be like Salman Rushdie and stand up to Islamic thuggery, or it can be like Random House and respond in a cowardly manner that not only encourages the growth of Islamic social cancers, but also shows the publisher’s blatant hypocrisy, and its overwhelming fear of Islamists.

Random House wasn’t so worried or sensitive to the feelings of others when it published Phillip Pullman’s The Golden Compass, a work that is probably more offensive to Christians than Jones’ novel is to Muslims. Random House didn’t just publish The Golden Compass; it flogged it:

Collectively, the promotional partnerships will result in approximately $50 million worth of advertising support, one billion consumer impressions, and $120 million of media value worldwide. Additionally, New Line has over 75 licensed partners producing hundreds of Golden Compass-related products worldwide, in six different categories including retail, beverage/concessions, non-profit, publishing, home entertainment, and in-book and online.

Wow!  That kind of corporate commitment behind a movie that promotes a deliberately anti-Christian POV could be really dangerous … NOT.  Christians don’t issue fatwahs. Christians don’t burn down embassies … or publishing houses, for that matter. And Christians don’t shoot artists eight times and leave them dead.

Because Islam allows violent Islamists who carry out those acts and worse to thrive within the bounds of their religion, and because Random House won’t show an ounce of courage, we the people are being deprived of a book that sounds as if it would be fascinating and insightful.

Point and match, Osama. The game is still ours to lose.

“The court finds the memorial at Mt. Soledad, including its Latin cross, communicates the primarily nonreligious messages of military service, death and sacrifice. As such, despite its location on public land, the memorial is constitutional.”

-U.S. District Judge Larry Alan Burns

I

t’s a shame something so simple as placing a cross in an overwhelmingly Christian nation has become so difficult, and can be allowed only by so narrow a definition as this fine-grained parsing by Judge Burns. But still, a victory is a victory and the Soledad cross lives on.

And so does its opposition. According to the LA Times, the ACLU is considering an appeal to the very liberal 9th Circuit.

Ironically, it was another version of the sort of liberal craziness we see from the ACLU and the 9th Circuit that turned Judge Burns’ decision:

In his ruling Burns agreed that the cross is the preeminent symbol of Christianity, but said “it does not follow the cross has no other meaning or significance.” He pointed to the exhibits on public beaches, such as Santa Monica’s, where the group Veterans for Peace uses crosses in the sand to represent U.S. service members who died in Iraq.

Apparently the Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy isn’t coordinating its messaging strategies effectively.

T

he Chinese are hobbling the Internet for the Olympics - not a surprise. The surprise is how the left is reacting.

A couple examples of hobbling. First, BBC reports on the restrictions journalists will face when they log on in the People’s Republic:

Journalists covering the Beijing Olympic Games will not have completely uncensored access to the internet, Chinese and Olympic officials say.

Sites related to spiritual group Falun Gong would be blocked, officials said. Journalists also found they could not see some news or human rights websites.

The timing of the blockade was interesting. As the first of an anticipated 20,000 journalists descended on Beijing to cover the games, Amnesty International issued a report on how China’s miserable human rights record has gotten even worse with the Olympics. Journalists visiting China couldn’t access it, but the Beijingoists couldn’t stop people elsewhere around the globe from accessing the report, however, so the ban is comically inadequate.

Another example, from AP, is China’s forcing of foreign owned hotels to comply with China’s Public Security Service demand that they install software blocking their guests’ access to the sites of human rights, Falun Gong, Tibetan activists and others. (Chinese owned hotels don’t need any forcing by the way; they know the drill.) Senator Sam Brownback said of this:

“These hotels are justifiably outraged by this order, which puts them in the awkward position of having to craft pop-up messages explaining to their customers that their Web history, communications, searches and key strokes are being spied on by the Chinese government.”

The purpose of China’s efforts is not to protect the Chinese people from any threat, it is merely to spare the nation’s Communist rulers embarrassment on their home court. Behind the heavy-handed Olympic efforts is a much more sinister and far-flung machinery that monitors all Chinese communications from the Internet to the backyard fence that results in the arrest, imprisonment and frequent execution of anyone deemed to be an enemy of the state.

The difference between China’s use of electronic surveillance and America’s use seems to be lost on the left. In his Salon column today, Glenn Greenwald leaps effortlessly and brainlessly from the Chinese pressure on hotels to U.S. cooperation with telcom companies to monitor terrorists’ calls.

The precise financial dynamic which Sen. Brownback is impotently protesting in China — that corporations are highly incentivized to assent to and enable all government spying lest they lose extremely lucrative government contracts (and, conversely, that they’re eager to cooperate with the Government in order to receive more contracts and become further integrated in government activities) — is exactly the dynamic that drives America’s surveillance state. …

[T]o watch U.S. Senators like Sam Brownback actually maintain a straight face while protesting China’s warrantless spying on the email and telephone communications of foreigners, and lamenting that private companies feel unfairly pressured to cooperate with China’s government spying out of fear of losing lucrative business opportunities, is so surreal that it’s actually hard to believe one is seeing it.

Surreal? Exactly the dynamic? This is exactly why the left is so dangerous: It cannot make rational evaluations based on good and evil, so it ends up supporting evil.

China’s government is motivated by its will to stay in power by suppressing political resistance and keeping a tight reign on the rights and freedom of its citizens. America’s government, the Bush administration, knows it will relinquish power peacefully and democratically in January 2009 just as it remembers the attacks that occurred in September 2001, so its motivation is wholly different: to protect America, so its citizens can continue to enjoy safety, rights and freedom.

Further, the Chinese government can do whatever it wants to do because it is authoritarian, lacking all checks and balances. Grrenwald may have missed the fact that the entire matter of electronic surveillance has been vetted thoroughly by our courts and our elected representatives, so this isn’t, as Greenwald characterizes it, simply the Bush administration running renegade again.

That point is completely lost on Greenwald and his readers, as this comment makes clear:

Brownback keeps a straight face because the US does its spying in secret. The Chinese are evil because they say right in the Guest Information that they are watching. Americans would never do that.

Mere parity is not enough for these loons. The left will not stop until they succeed at placing the globe’s repressors on a pedestal and submitting America to mockery.

UPDATED BELOW

A

s the 4th wound down towards evening here on the West Coast, my heart was pouring out to the decent people of Gualala, California, whose 4th of July fireworks show was banned by the California Coastal Commission, much to the joy of a hard core of negative, anti-fun, people-hating nature lovers.

I wrote one piece on the battle for the Gualala fireworks show here. There’s a pretty balanced LA Times piece here.

I had to take another piece off the blog when my First Amendment freedoms were attacked by a Gualalan anti-fireworks advocate who went way beyond the bounds of the debate and tried to get my agency fired by one of my clients for what I wrote.

Fireworks are a remembrance of the battles fought to secure our freedom and a celebration of the freedoms we must fight to protect. It’s symbolic that there weren’t fireworks in Gualala last night, because fanatic nature-lovers have teamed up with the regulatory over-killers of the Coastal Commission to deprive good people of a fun celebration.

I worry that Gualala is just the first to fall, and that soon we will see fireworks shows up and down the coast of California being canceled for no other reason than the celebrations of our nation’s birth keep birds up an hour later.

Update

The Gualala Festivals Committee created the fireworks show to increase summer business, the lifeblood of the remote town. My source on the committee provided me with this update yesterday evening, about an hour before the now-banned fireworks show would have begun:

Sometimes I hate to be right

This is one of those times

Last 2 years all were booked solid by this time

Last 2 years thousands were crowding the streets at this time

Last 2 years the store parking lots were full most of the day

As of 6:30 PM there are vacancies at all hotels and motels – except one

Traffic is driving through town – not stopping

The best restaurant in town – which was booked solid ALL DAY last year – has 2 reservations for tonight and the owner said today was a “financial disaster” for a holiday

The other restaurants similar

The town is almost empty

Tomorrow I will walk the businesses and get a better feel about the actual money issues

Happy 4th of July!

Happy, indeed! A small group of radical environmentalists has put their selfish need to feel they are the saviors of birds that don’t need saving ahead of the very real financial needs of families. Shame on them, and shame on the Coastal Commission for playing along in this game.

The struggle goes on. The Pacific Legal Foundation is suing to return to the Festival Committee the right to celebrate the 4th of July with fireworks so that fireworks can return in 2009. Read more here. Contribute here.

T

his definitely warrants looking into.

That’s the subject line of an email received by Institute for Advanced Study scholar Danielle Allen - and, boy, did she end up looking into it.

Allen’s field of study is the machinery of politics and her candidate is Barack Obama, so when she received this email claiming Obama is hiding his Muslim roots and could be Islam’s Manchurian Candidate, she decided to dig. After all, her job required nothing more of her than that she think - no classes to teach, no papers to publish.

The whole deal is laid out in a four-clicker from WaPo today, and it’s a marginally interesting read from an Internet sleuthing angle … and a raucous read from a freedom of speech point of view and definitely from blind political bias point of view.