I’m an Extremist, She’s an Extremist, Wouldn’t You Like To Be an Extremist too??

Disclaimer:

I’m not a Bush supporter. I’m not a Republican.
I am a Libertarian, a strict Constitutionalist, and a Blogger for Liberty.

---

Remember the days when us wing nuts told you that the Obama administration would be worse than the Bush era? I’m an equal opportunity basher when it comes to the NO common sense policies that interrupt the common good of all my American fellow citizens. I have no issue beating a dead horse, especially if I think it still contains a wisp of life, a last breath, or postmortem flatulence, I don’t care. (PETA, don’t mail me). All you people who voted for Obama, did so without any record to point to that said he was the man for the job. Not only has he gaffed in ways that would’ve made Bush blush, and would’ve had blood shooting out of the eyes of liberals back in the Bush days of old–his worst gaff yet was appointing a Homeland Security Secretary who thinks that labeling all Americans, including veterans as extremists and potential terrorists is appropriate.

Meet Janet Napolitano.

She is so PC that the government is no longer “allowed” to call Islamic Terrorists, “terrorists”. The correct term under the Obama administration to describe actual terrorists are “man made disasters”. That is of course, unless you’re an American, then you may be labeled a terrorist, and that is my friends, politically correct under the Obama list of common sense protocol. According to the “”Domestic Extremism Lexicon” you are an extremist. YES YOU. I will exclude you of course if you are comatose, a droid, a mannequin, or if you’re effectively brain dead. Otherwise, you will fall into one of the categories below

In my best Red Neck twang, I submit to you by a preponderance of proof provided by PC Janet Napolitano

You Might be an extremist if :

• You listen to or read alternative media sources that portray significant events differently than that of the mass media outlets.

• you are anti-illegal immigration

• you are a Cuban and /or anti Castro ( of cuba? ya know, a communist government?)

• you and your friends are individuals who pursue shared ideological goals (to be fair the rest says—->through tactics of leaderless resistance independent of any larger terrorist organization (can anyone say Bill Ayers? Tony Rezko?)

• you believe in civil disobedience to change laws ( can anyone say Martin Luther King?) or you protest (dang tea bagging protesting rednecks! Gahh!)

• you oppose most federal and state laws, regulations, and authority, particularly firearms laws and regulations.

• you are a  Christian patriot, or are affiliated with  patriot groups, or Constitutionalists

• you’re a Christian who believes that following God is above all and refuse to follow all other government laws that may compromise your faith

• you believe the tax code is the equivalent to theft

Notice two things when you investigate the link to this latest proud display of our tax dollars at work. 1) Your government does not want you to know that they are profiling you. The warning states : It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating to FOUO information and is not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval of an authorized DHS official. State and local homeland security officials may share this document with authorized security personnel without further approval from DHS. (so much for the Obama promise of transparency)

and notice how I didn’t say “I told you so!!” 

Domestic Extremism Lexicon : http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/04/30/-hsra-domestic-extremism-lexicon_165213935473.pdf

Score one for religious freedoms

A dear friend sent me this link. I was rather intrigued to see that finally, the First Amendment nonsense that the ACLU uses against Christians was used FOR a Christian law suit. I can’t help but wonder what the ACLU thinks about this? I read this through and was taken back 6 years. My oldest daughter used to attend public schools. One day she came home in tears because her teacher had told her that she could no longer wear her icthus necklace. Apparantly, a young Muslim boy attended her school and had complained that it offended him to see it worn. In an effort to avoid a lawsuit, they asked that my daughter no longer wear her necklace. I was infuriated, but my ex-husband would not allow ne to press the issue, making our daughter a “poster child for First Amendment rights”. Three weeks later, I happened upon a young boy walking down the hallway of her school, carrying a mat. I asked him where he was going. He replied that he was on his way to the gym to attend to his prayers. It seemed that i had encountered the very same young man that had been offended by my daughter’s simple display of faith! The school insisted that they could not infringe upon his religious freedom to go pray in the gym, but had refused my daughter’s right to express her faith through a simple accessory. I can’t help but wonder why her faith was denied, but his was allowed to be expressed. Does the Muslim faith or any other not violate the same “seperation of church and state” that the ACLU screams about?

To see a win like this for the Christian faith is good. For far too long, our rights have been trampled on.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518864,00.html

SANTA ANA, Calif. —  A federal judge ruled that a public high school history teacher violated the First Amendment when he called creationism “superstitious nonsense” during a classroom lecture…

It’s not too late to stand up for our faith and let the world know that we will not be denied!

The Right To Raise Your Child

Parents in America take for granted that they have the right to raise their child as they see fit.  Except in cases of severe, proved abuse or neglect, the government does not interfere.  In those cases where it does, local government agencies work to protect the child while at the same time providing ample opportunity for the parent to regain or maintain parenting control.

That could change, if the United Nations Children’s Rights treaty is signed by President Barack Obama.  It was brought to the table during the Clinton administration, and defeated, though narrowly.  It’s back.

If passed, the treaty would ban homeschool and private school options, require sex and drug education without the parental right to opt their child out, give children the right to challenge any parenting decision in court, forbid parents from deciding their child’s religion or religious observances, make all forms of corporal punishment illegal, prevent minors under the age of 18 from being tried as adults under any circumstances, allow minors to obtain birth control and/or abortions without parental notification or consent, and give ultimate authority over any parenting decisions to the UN.

Christians aren’t the only ones affected by this!  Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Budhists, Wiccans, Agnostics, Atheists, and everyone that I left out – your faith is being threatened too.  You would be forbidden under this treaty to raise your child according to your faith – whatever it happens to be.  If your child doesn’t want to attend religious observances, s/he can take you to court and allow the United Nations to decide if doing so is in “the best interest of the child” or not.

This is the ultimate issue of sovereignty.  Hitler knew that the way to control a country completely was to teach the children according to the nazi doctrines.  The Hitler Youth Organization was a testament to the success of this theory.  The United Nations is now taking this concept to a global level, removing all parenting authority from parents and placing it in the hands of a single world-wide governing body.

Interestingly, the treaty says nothing of parental responsibility.  Presumably, parents would still be responsible for decisions made by their minor children – even if they have no authority to control such decisions.

Who should bear the ultimate responsibility for raising a child – the parents, or the government?