ChristiansUnite Forums

ChristiansUnite and Announcements => ChristiansUnite and Announcements => Topic started by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:08:25 PM

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:08:25 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (


"Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom." --John Adams

Big Brother Will Educate Your Children Now

It's like 1984 all over again

Tuesday, Sept. 8, is the first day of classes in many schools across the Fruited Plain -- and Barack Hussein Obama will use his presidential bully pulpit to interrupt the very start of classroom studies with an unprecedented nationwide speech to students, from pre-school to K-12. Schools technically have the option to show the broadcast from the White House Web site or on C-SPAN, but then again, the ratio of Democrats to Republicans in public education is at least 3-to-1, making forced viewing more likely.

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan wrote in a letter to school principals (, "The President will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. He will also call for a shared responsibility and commitment on the part of students, parents and educators to ensure that every child in every school receives the best education possible so they can compete in the global economy for good jobs and live rewarding and productive lives as American citizens."

The truly troubling part of this episode of "Everybody Loves Barack" is that the Department of Education posted "helpful" lesson plans ( to be used before, during and after Obama's speech.

One idea included in the initial lesson plan was for students to "write letters to themselves about what they can do to help the president." Uproar ensued, however, and that was changed. Now students can "write letters to themselves about how they can achieve their short-term and long-term education goals." Slightly altered, but students are still encouraged to discuss what "the president wants us to do."

We have a different take for teachers. Back in October, when charged that he was a socialist, Obama explained ( what he meant by "shared responsibility," saying, "I don't know what's next. By the end of the week [John McCain will] be accusing me of being a secret communist because ... I shared, I, I, I, I shared my, uhh... I shared my peanut butter and jelly sandwich." Of course, Obama wasn't and isn't proposing to share his sandwich. Instead, he promises to confiscate your sandwich and give it to someone else whom he deems more worthy.

At the same time, Obama said of McCain's opposition to tax hikes, "You know I, I, I don't know when, when, uh, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness." This from the guy who, between 2000 and 2006, gave a whopping two percent of his income for charitable purposes.

So, if teachers break down Obama's real philosophy, they will have plenty of fodder for truthful discussions of his nefarious plots against all things American, without his propaganda drivel. Then again, on "Obama Cult of Personality Day," responsible parents may opt out of this "teachable moment" and just call their kids in sick.

This Week's 'Alpha Jackass' Award

"So much of the debate about President Obama has been politicized in an effort by some to delegitimize his presidency. This is clearly much ado about nothing. We're talking about the president of the United States speaking to school kids. Why wouldn't schools want this to happen? That's why our kids are so dumb today, because they don't want to have basic common sense in the classroom." --CNBC contributor Keith Boykin, trying to de-link the upcoming Obama Big Brother speech to school children from good ol' American horse sense

ObamaCare on Shaky Ground

After giving instructions to America's children, Barack Obama will turn his attention to the children on Capitol Hill -- those occupying seats in Congress. In a prime time address to Congress on Wednesday, Sept. 9, the president will focus on ramming through ObamaCare as soon as possible. Aside from the State of the Union, or the traditional first address by a newly elected president, such speeches before Congress, to date, have been rare. Indeed, the last one was on Sept. 20, 2001, in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

According to White House adviser David Axelrod, Obama's speech will be "more prescriptive" on what the administration is looking for in the bill. "Now hang on a second," says Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto ( "We know July was a long time ago, but we distinctly remember back then that the administration was demanding that Congress pass ObamaCare before the August recess. And the president is only now getting around to telling us what ObamaCare even is?"

One thing that ObamaCare may not feature overtly is a public option, despite Obama's previous claims that the legislation "must include" such a provision. But, as we warned two weeks ago, this apparent concession is a bid to get the bill through the Senate, only to add it back in the House-Senate reconciliation conference. Democrats are certainly reeling from a scorching August, suffering burns from their constituents at town hall meetings, not from supposed global warming. So the appearance of concessions helps take heat off Democrats in red states. But bear that in mind as debate moves forward and congressmen once again drink the bewitched waters of the Potomac River. After all, with wild-eyed ObamaCare supporters biting off the fingers of opponents (, Democrats need to produce results, sooner rather than later. Public option or not, this horrendous legislation will be a foot in the door to single-payer, government-run health care.

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:10:25 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (

Speaking of protests, here are two videos from the week:

"It ain't [America] no more, okay?" ( -- Fairfax County (VA) School District Police Officer Wesley Cheeks Jr. tells a protester that he can "charge [him] with whatever I want to" because the protester has an anti-ObamaCare sign the officer doesn't like.

U.S. Soldier Demands Apology From Senator Claire McCaskill at Town Hall ( -- a soldier explains the difference between his keeping of his oath to support and defend (, and McCaskill's eagerness to break that oath.

On Cross-Examination

"They're not at the center of the great debate over what the president and his allies call the 'reform' of American health care. Nor are they even at the periphery. But health savings accounts -- remember them? -- are still alive and growing. ... [However,] the reform schemes pushed by Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress would almost surely mean the end of HSAs. Even without well-funded government coverage to compete with private insurers, the proposed insurance 'exchange' at the heart of the Democratic plans would require something similar, a top-of-the-line private plan, from its participants. It would have no place for cheap, basic plans that -- like true insurance -- cover just the big costs and require policyholders to pay out-of-pocket for routine care and drugs. And if the exchange doesn't kill HSAs, Congress could do the job by axing the tax-deductibility of HSA contributions. So would this be all that great a loss? With just a sliver of the public occupying the HSA niche, wiping out HSAs wouldn't change the current landscape much. But the future landscape might be much different, and not for the better. Letting HSAs die would preclude real reform -- by which we mean reform that actually cuts costs without rationing by government or corporate bureaucrats." --Investor's Business Daily (

Hope 'n' Change: Obama Holds Fiscal Line on Federal Raises

During his seven-plus months in the Oval Office, Barack Obama has requested and signed a number of budget-busting measures. However, he is drawing the line on federal pay increases for 2010 by reducing the increase from a planned 2.4 percent down to 2 percent (don't Democrats usually call that a cut?) -- a whopping 17 percent reduction in the employee raises. In a statement to Congress, Obama revealed he had budgeted only $19.9 billion for pay increases, an amount corresponding to the 2 percent hike. Conversely, raising the federal payroll by the full 2.4 percent would have cost taxpayers $22.6 billion.

Looking at the spending liberals are proposing in new government programs like cap-n-tax and government-run health care, being miserly in this case is enough to make us recall the phrase, "penny wise and pound foolish." It goes without saying though that even a 2 percent raise would look great to private-sector workers who took pay cuts this year, or, at best, saw no increase in their salary. Then there are those whose jobs have disappeared under the Obama regime -- another 216,000 more in August alone (unemployment stands at 9.7 percent, a 26-year high).

Meanwhile, Partnership for Public Service, a think tank, conducted a survey of 35 federal agencies and concluded that the federal government needs to hire at least 270,000 more workers for "mission-critical" jobs in the next three years. No doubt Obama will be glad to oblige.

Gore Invented It ... Will Obama Control It?

A bill pending in the Senate has aroused controversy from civil liberties groups who say the prospect of government control of the Internet in case of a "national emergency" leaves the door open for blatant political shenanigans. S. 773 was heavily revised after its introduction earlier this year but remains vague on what would constitute a "cybersecurity emergency," where private computers could be forcibly disconnected from the Internet by none other than Obama. A second provision allows the federal government to certify "cybersecurity professionals" who would be the only ones allowed to be "provider(s) of cybersecurity services to any Federal agency."

Should S. 773 pass, Obama would "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." Isn't this the same guy who called for his sycophants to report "fishy" health care information to, all while spamming the American people? Supporters compare the power this bill gives to the president with that of George W. Bush ordering the grounding of aircraft after 9/11. One major difference: There are travel alternatives to aircraft; we have no viable substitute for the Internet.

New & Notable Legislation

It seems that cap-n-tax isn't quite as popular as some Democrats would have us believe. Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and John Kerry (D-MA) announced that the legislation will be postponed in the Senate for up to a month. Apparently, they don't have the requisite 60 votes, despite a 60-seat Democrat super-majority plus five or six spineless Republicans. Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) admitted last month, "I have to be honest with you. As a whip, I count the votes and I count the days in the week, and I look at this rulebook in the Senate and think this is not an easy lift. I think we can still do it, but it's a question of timing." The House passed the bill by a razor-thin margin in June, and even then only after weeks of browbeating and backroom deals to coerce a few Blue Dogs into toeing the party line. Lo and behold, there is a glimmer of hope after all.

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:12:02 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (

From the Left: Racial 'Justice'

The Justice Department is planning to hire more than 50 new civil rights lawyers whose job will be to target "racism" in America. So much for Barack Obama's post-racial presidency. Indeed, it seems that Eric Holder's contemptible job as Attorney General is to politicize and racialize "justice," both by investigating the good guys at the CIA for protecting America over the last eight years and now by rooting out (read: making up) "racism."

Naturally, to liberals, racism is a one-way street. In February, Holder, who is black, said, "In things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards." He continued, "We, as average Americans, simply do not talk enough with each other about race." Now, thanks to Holder, some folks can look forward to talking more about race -- from within a Justice Department interrogation room.

Warfront With Jihadistan: Iranian Nuclear Games

On Tuesday, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Said Jalili, announced that Iran has prepared a new proposal for discussion and negotiation over its nuclear program. Iran and the P-5+1 (U.S., Britain, France, China, Russia and Germany) will meet later this week in Germany. Jalili, who is also secretary of Iran's powerful Supreme Council for National Security, offered no details of the proposals, claiming only that he hoped they would lead to "justice and peace."

Why is Iran suddenly so eager to talk? Undoubtedly because the International Atomic Energy Agency's Board of Governors is scheduled to meet on Sept. 7 in Vienna to discuss Iran's nuclear program. The Board's latest report was distributed to member governments last week and was almost certainly passed to Iran via China, Russia or Cuba, all of whom are current members. While the report has not yet been released publicly, our sources indicate that key findings of the previous report -- that Iran has not adequately answered outstanding questions about its military-related activities, that it has not suspended enrichment work or work on its heavy water reactor, and that the rogue regime has not cooperated sufficiently with the IAEA in addressing remaining issues -- will be repeated in the latest report.

While the United States holds the rotating presidency of the UN Security Council during the month of September and thus can exert significant influence over the UNSC agenda at its full meeting later this month, that influence will likely be a push toward Obama's stated goal of nuclear disarmament -- of the good guys. Iran is preparing once again to feign cooperation, all while stalling to further develop their nuclear arms capabilities -- a kabuki dance Iran has perfected over the last six years.

Missile Defense Shot Down

Tuesday, Sept. 1, marked the 70th anniversary of the German invasion of Poland, which began World War II. The proximity of this grim anniversary to the Obama administration's decision to cut missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic is chilling, although American Leftmedia hardly noticed.

Buckling under pressure from Russia, our novice commander in chief agreed that any missile defense system for allies in Europe would be built in the Balkans, or maybe Israel. Forget the promise made by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in July that the U.S. would offer a "security umbrella" for our allies. Forget doing what Obama promised would be most "pragmatic and cost-effective." The bad news: Obama has left two brave allies hanging before a threatening Russian bear and has damaged U.S. international credibility in the process. Iran could be less than a year from producing nuclear weapons, while Russia recently tested two new Sineva class submarine-based ICBMs. Apparently, Russia's intimidation worked. The Washington Times aptly summed up the situation: ( "There is no upside."

Afghan Embassy Problems

The New York Daily News reports ( on trouble at the U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan: "Prostitutes allegedly were brought in [by private guards] for birthday parties, drunken guards engaged in brawls and boozy lawn parties turned into naked affairs where guests urinated on one another, according to photos and videos obtained by the nonprofit group" Project on Government Oversight. Furthermore, the report found sleep-deprived guards who are working 14-hour days. With our Marines busy hunting down bad guys around the world, private contractor ArmorGroup supplies 450 guards of various nationalities at the embassy, usually a Marine function. The Daily News notes, "Secretary of State Clinton ordered an investigation on Tuesday into the Animal House revels ... including booze, hookers and other 'deviant behavior.'" And really, who better than a Clinton to investigate such activities? Bill probably has a plane ticket already booked.

Obama Continues to Pressure Honduras

For much of his presidency, George W. Bush bore liberal attacks on basically everything he did and said. One of the most common accusations was that he was "imperialist" and that under his leadership America had become an international bully. Well, where are all those liberals now that Barack Obama and his band of merry thugs are trying to bully Honduras into returning to power a leader who violated their own constitution?

Despite steadfast refusal of Hondurans to become victims of former President Manuel Zelaya, a would-be communist dictator, the Obama administration continues to pressure them in order to curry favor with the likes of Hugo Chavez, the Castro Brothers and fellow communist Leonel Fernandez, president of the Dominican Republic. On Thursday, the Obama administration officially cut off all aid to Honduras, totaling $31 million in non-humanitarian assistance. The announcement came as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was meeting with Zelaya. "The secretary of state has made the decision, consistent with U.S. legislation, recognizing the need for strong measures in light of the continued resistance to the adoption of the San Jose Accord by the de facto regime and continuing failure to restore democratic, constitutional rule to Honduras," State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said.

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:13:50 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (

Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution specifically states that a president trying to extend his term forfeits his right to remain in office, and with good reason. Hugo Chavez was originally elected president of Venezuela but soon corrupted the democracy from the inside until he became dictator in 1998. So, oddly enough, with the lawful ouster of Zelaya Honduras maintained constitutional rule of law. But what does the Obama regime know about that?

Honduran Interior Minister Oscar Raul Matute wrote rather pointedly in a letter to Clinton, "Whether you wish us well or not, we will pay any price, we will bear any burden, we will take on any difficulty, we will support any friend and oppose any enemy to ensure the survival and the success of liberty and democracy in our country." Quoting from John F. Kennedy's 1961 inaugural address certainly gets the point across.

Income Redistribution: Investor Tax

The AFL-CIO has long dug into its members' pockets to line the coffers of Washington Leftists. Now, it wants to dig into everyone else's. In comradeship with some congressional Democrats, the nation's largest labor union is proposing a tax on every stock transaction. The levy, equal to about one tenth of one percent, would purportedly generate as much as $100 billion, which could then be used for, well, whatever whims Washington whips up.

The idea is that big investment firms make big money by engaging in big volumes of trade. But anything "big" not immediately followed by "government" is apparently a big problem to Big Labor. According to AFL-CIO Policy Director Thea Lee, the transactions "make money, but does it really add to the productive base of the United States?" Well, yes, for anyone who understands Economics 101, but not so when "productive" is in the eye of wealth-warring union crusaders in cahoots with leftist bureaucrats.

Investor's Business Daily ( calls the proposal "the dream of all the global social engineers -- a massive tax on wealth that could be used by unaccountable international bureaucrats for their grand schemes to make a better world." But as IBD so eloquently warns, "There's an old rule in economics: Anything you tax, you get less of. Tax investments, you'll get less investment. And that's the last thing we need."

The Taxman Cometh

"Tax deadbeats are finding someone actually reads their MySpace and Facebook postings: the taxman," reports The Wall Street Journal ( "State revenue agents have begun nabbing scofflaws by mining information posted on social-networking Web sites, from relocation announcements to professional profiles to financial boasts." The Journal relays several stories of citizens who had to pay up after postings on MySpace (which defaults to show the most public information), Facebook (though its default is to release very little public information) and other networking sites led authorities to them. The busts include back-taxes for a man who announced a new job and his new employer's name, taxes from a deejay who posted an upcoming job, and delinquent payment from a man identified through a discussion board. Some tax officials also use Google to track down tax evaders. The Journal adds, "An Internal Revenue Service spokesman declined to say whether its agents use social-networking sites to pursue delinquent taxes or assist audits." Don't put it past them, though. We think it's just a ploy for tax collectors to get online and pretend they have friends.

The Next Bailout

The Wall Street Journal reports ( on yet another government bailout at taxpayer expense. It seems that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) is burning through its reserves. In the last year the FDIC has paid out in excess of $34.8 billion. Additionally, the FDIC's list of troubled banks has increased from 305 to 416, even as it has closed 84 since the beginning of this year. The true scope of the problem is unfathomable. Now the FDIC is letting Congress and the nation's bankers know that they may need more cash from either increased insurance premiums, special assessments or perhaps even the Treasury itself.

Deposit insurance premiums are (supposed to be) risk based. The CAMEL ratings (for risk factors Capital adequacy, Asset quality, Management competence, Earnings and Liquidity) are between one (best) and five (worst) and averaged for a composite value. But don't ask your local banker his CAMEL rating because he can't tell you -- it's a secret. That is one component of the moral hazard that accompanies deposit insurance. With a bank's level of safety and soundness concealed, depositors must base their decisions only upon expected rate of return.

In a supposed attempt to keep the insurance fund solvent, FDIC hit the nation's banks with a special assessment in the fourth quarter of 2008, causing a further depletion of capital from the banking system as a whole and forcing even more marginal banks into the red. Banking trade associations have been advising their members to expect a similar special assessment in 4Q2009. These increased expenses reduce the net income of individual banks, thus further straining their ability to retain earnings to improve their capital adequacy. To control cost and preserve earnings, bankers are giving deposit rates hard scrutiny. Couple this with FDIC's quiet request to Congress for the authority to borrow up to $500 billion from the U.S. Treasury (five times its regular borrowing limit,) and one can see taxpayers squeezed, on the one hand, by lower interest rates on savings and, on the other hand, higher taxes to service increased federal debt.

Bottom line is that deposit insurance is not free, and as with all insurance, there are inherent risks. After a 15-year expansion in the U.S. economy (1992-2007) with banks being encouraged (or, perhaps more accurately, extorted) to engage in increasingly risky loans, (sub-prime mortgages, community re-development and re-investment) the current economic contraction has exposed bankers to increased risk, which may ultimately be borne by the taxpayer.

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:15:14 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (

What Does 9/11 Mean to You?

It was just eight years ago that America woke to terror playing out in the sky. Nearly 3,000 dead later, President Bush began fighting back against Islamic terrorism (or as we like to call it in our humble shop, Jihadistan) -- which far-left Democrats later opposed as soon as it became politically expedient to do so.

Now that those far leftists are in charge, they're moving to change the very meaning of 9/11 from a day of remembrance for those who lost their lives in New York, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania to what The American Spectator's Matthew Vadum ( calls "a day of leftist celebration and statist idolatry." Their official motto is "United We Share." In April, when the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act was signed into law, it was stated that "there isn't a better or more fitting way to remember 9/11 than for all of us as Americans to voluntarily set aside time on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks to help others in need." Disregard the fact that we have thousands of troops overseas still fighting the very war 9/11 ignited. But Obama is a community organizer...

In fact, (a.k.a. "Organizing for America") called on Americans to volunteer to set aside time to flood the congressional switchboard with phone calls in support of ObamaCare "as we fight back against our own Right-Wing Domestic Terrorists ( who are subverting the American Democratic Process" -- at least until they took the Web page down because of negative media attention.

As for us, our service on 9/11 will be that of remembrance for our fallen in the Long War and renewal of our resolve to help others in need by ridding the world of the scourge of Islamic terrorism. Our motto remains "United We Stand!"

Many Patriots will observe 9/11 in other appropriate manner, as well. For example, one reader let us know that a group of them will be on the I-75 overpass at Wade Green Road (Exit 273) in Kennesaw, Georgia, with banners and poignant reminders of what happened that fateful day. He said, "We wave flags for as long as we last, from 8:00 a.m. until around 1:00 p.m. We stop and pray as a group at the exact time each plane hit." Police not only said permission wasn't necessary, but thanked the group for their efforts and offered to help secure the area.

Climate Change This Week: CO2 a Pollutant?

Talk about taking the concept of "man-made pollution" to the next level: The Environmental Protection Agency, an unelected bunch of power-mad bureaucrats, is on the verge of declaring carbon dioxide and five other alleged greenhouse gases "dangerous pollutants," which will require the federal government to regulate them, even absent cap-n-tax legislation. How convenient. Considering the fact that human beings (even fire-breathing Leftists) exhale carbon dioxide with every breath, this -- even for Democrats -- would be heavy handed.

The EPA's move is little more than blackmail. Many legislators, including some Democrats, are already "expressing concern" about the proposed cap-n-tax legislation; and no wonder, considering that in countries already saddled with such legislation, the standard of living decreased 5-10 percent with little to no decrease in emissions. So, while the EPA is finding a back door to regulate our lives, all we know is that we live and breathe for CO2.

In the meantime, John Kerry is jumping on Al Gore's bandwagon, comparing opposition to a government response to global warming to "George Bush's inaction before 9/11." Kerry added, "Make no mistake: catastrophic climate change represents a threat to human security, global stability, and -- yes -- even to American national security." Perhaps this lunacy is an up and coming trend for Democrats who lose presidential elections.

Back in reality, scientists continue to churn out evidence that global warming hysterics (Warmers) are wrong. A recent paper by MIT's Professor Richard Lindzen shows how the UN and the IPCC are distorting the facts. Whereas the UN/IPCC base their conclusions on predictions, Lindzen and other reputable scientists use real data. Lindzen found that the IPP speculations of a 2.4 to 5.3 degrees C increase in temperature per century is in direct contradiction to actual data collected between 1980 and 2009, which shows an increase of only 1.5 degrees C per century. In other words, to say only that Warmers are greatly exaggerating the impact of carbon dioxide to global warming is to understate the extent of their deceit.

From the 'Non Compos Mentis' File

Vermont opened the floodgates this week to allow same-sex marriages, joining several other New England states in running as far as possible from their Puritan heritage. Joining in the celebration was Ben & Jerry's ice cream brand, which temporarily renamed its "Chubby Hubby" ice cream "Hubby Hubby." Still, the move is largely symbolic, since Ben & Jerry's won't change labels on ice cream cartons in retail outlets. According to a spokesman, such changes take 18 months, though Ben & Jerry's hasn't ruled out future retailing with the "Hubby Hubby" label, and Vermont's six ice cream parlors will be selling special "Hubby Hubby" sundaes during September. Word is there's no charge for rainbow sprinkles.

Title: The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
Post by: nChrist on September 04, 2009, 05:16:52 PM
The Patriot Post Digest 9-35
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription (

Faith and Family: Lutheran Update

Correction: Last week, we reported on the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's vote to allow homosexuals in same-sex relationships to serve as clergy. We quoted Barbara Wheeler as the former president of Autumn Theological Seminary in New York City. Wheeler was president of Auburn Theological Seminary. Sometimes spell check isn't as helpful as we would like.

Also, many readers wrote us asking that we not confuse the ELCA with more conservative Lutheran denominations we did not mention -- the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. We were aware of the other denominations and regret any confusion. Both conservative and liberal denominations also exist, for example, within the Baptist and Presbyterian traditions.

Finally, as recounted by Center for Lutheran Theology and Public Life Director Uwe Siemon-Netto, "Just as [ELCA] delegates worked themselves up to their decision to allow homosexuals in committed relationships to serve as pastors, a highly selective tornado knocked the cross off the roof of Central Lutheran Church in Minneapolis, where some of their shameful meetings took place." To which we say, "Amen, and amen."

And Last...

When we saw the Associated Press headline ( "Honolulu seeking to ban 'BO' on buses," we thought it was unconscionable that Hawaii's capital would single out the president and prohibit his riding the bus in his, ahem, place of birth. But upon further review, it appears the real problem is body odor. Apparently, citizens of Honolulu are tired of suffering from stinky bodies -- so much so that the city council is considering imposing a $500 fine and/or up to six months behind bars for public transit passengers who are deemed too smelly. A bill up for consideration would make it illegal to have "odors that unreasonably disturb others or interfere with their use of the transit system." And it matters not whether the pungent fumes emanate from clothes, personal belongings or even animals. All things considered, however, we'd take bad odor over BO any day.


Veritas vos Liberabit -- Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus, et Fidelis! Mark Alexander, Publisher, for The Patriot's editors and staff.

(Please pray for our Armed Forces standing in harm's way around the world, and for their families -- especially families of those fallen Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen, who granted their lives in defense of American liberty.)