Editor

Harry Reid Releases Romney Taxes

August 8, 2012 By Editor 5 Comments

After making shocking but unsubstantiated claims recently that Republican Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney has failed to pay taxes for 10 years, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid released secretly obtained copies of Mitt Romney’s tax returns today according to an unnamed source, proving that Romney has paid no taxes for at least one of those recent tax years.

Upon close inspection of the tax returns the White House authorities who authenticated the birth certificate of He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named have similarly attested to the authenticity of the Romney tax returns.

The most disturbing information discovered in the tax returns is that Presidential hopeful Romney made over $23 million and paid absolutely no income taxes.

The Senate Majority Leader made his stunning public announcement from a makeshift podium set up at the Disney World Dumbo ride, according to an unnamed source. Aids passed out copies of the 2009 Romney tax returns as Reid put on his Mickey Mouse ears and boarded the ride.

PUBLIUS ;)

The Western Pandemic of Islam

July 27, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Islam is self-proclaimed to be “the religion of peace,” and in our uncompromising quest for political correctness we deny ourselves the merest observation that “they” may be different from “us” in any measurable respect. Indeed, as Muslims walk the streets of western countries they do so in relative equality, and to the extent they are polite and attempt to blend with the local populations, they are welcomed as fellow citizens of the world, and extended the hand of brotherhood.

Each of us is free (as of this writing) to see the world from his own view, and we would hope that true bigotry, religious or otherwise, would not be condoned in any civilized society. However, there is a growing elephant in the room, and at some point one of us is going to have to point it out and we will all have to discuss it.

The Federalist Press editors enjoy many connections with friends and associates in Europe, and for years have listened with growing concern as anecdotal stories of increasing troubles with Muslim immigrants have been shared. Political correctness has run completely amok in Europe, and leftist governments and their state controlled media are loathe to admit that Muslim immigrants have gotten the best of them.

Indeed, as Muslim populations swell in Western countries we find certain patterns emerging—patterns which we are beginning to see in the Western hemisphere as well.

As the emphasis on marriage and the traditional family in Western countries has diminished, and the practice of abortion has increased, native local populations have sputtered.

Few seem to understand that the Fertility Rate (FR) of most of Western Europe has fallen below 2.11—the point of sustainability. A rate of 1.8 is considered extremely difficult to recover from, and 1.3 is nearly impossible. At this rate a culture will simply fade to oblivion. As of 2008 these are the Fertility Rates of a few European nations: France-1.8; England-1.6; Greece-1.3; Germany-1.3; Italy-1.2; and Spain-1.1. The average FR in 31 European Union countries is 1.38.

So why is the population of Europe growing so rapidly? Muslim immigration, and Muslim Fertility Rates.

For example, France’s FR of 1.8 is offset by the Muslim FR of 8.1. In fact, the south of France now has more Islamic Mosques than Christian churches. Also, 30% of its children under the age of 21 are Muslims, and the number climbs to 45% in large cities. At these rates, France will be an Islamic Republic within a generation.

In the Netherlands 50% of all newborns are Muslim, and in 10 years the population will approach 50% Muslim. These numbers hold true in Belgium as well.

England, where Muslim men were just discovered to be running sex slavery rings of local white girls, has seen a 30-fold increase in its Muslim population since 1970, and now has over 1,000 mosques.

There is a pattern to Muslim immigration into western countries. First, we see a wholesale drain on social services. In some publicized cases we find Muslim men collecting over $15,000 monthly from state welfare systems, receiving per capita stipends for each of their many children and wives (yes, wives). The social welfare systems of most chic EU members are depleted as a result, adding to the already heavily strained budgets that must pay out large pensions and benefits to union members who retired at young ages.

Then, these “peaceful” Islamic adherents tend to become more demanding and violent as their percentage of population grows in these countries, and leaders and agitators begin to demand “religious rights” (extended privileges and Sharia Law) for Muslims, occupying the streets or rioting and burning in protest.

Are western alarmists the only ones who see an imminent takeover of the West?

“There are signs that Allah will grant victory to Islam in Europe without swords, without guns, without conquest. We don’t need terrorists, we don’t need homicide bombers. The fifty-plus million Muslims there will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.” Muammar Gaddafi.

Perhaps Americans can afford complacency, many seem to believe. In fact, Canada, with its FR of 1.6, has had an increase in its population of over 2,000,000 in this past decade. How is that possible? Muslim immigration and FR.

What is America’s FR? It is down to a nearly unrecoverable 1.6. However, with the rapid Latino influx, our combined FR is 2.11—the bare minimum required to sustain a population, albeit a changing one. How about America’s Muslim population, you ask? In 1970 it was 100,000. Since then, it is difficult to tell, because the government doesn’t track them very closely (it’s not PC), but they tell us it is somewhere between a few million and 9,000,000.

Muslims are indeed beginning to become extremely vocal about demanding their “religious rights” in America. Demands for Sharia Law and examples of honor killings are springing up all around us. Liberal PC is enabling the behavior. We have witnessed that if Bill O’Reilly merely mentions on The View that it was Muslims who attacked Americans on 9/11 there is an orchestrated and exaggerated protest exodus of the hosts to enforce their PC speech limits—thus ensuring that no practical discussion occurs about safety or self-preservation.

With the rise of militant Islam in the West, it is time for a serious discussion on the direction we want our nations to take. If we do not make some tough, non-PC decisions soon, our granddaughters will be wearing burkas and will be stoned to death in the streets for whispering the name of Jesus. The current talk of gay marriage will be reduced to public beheadings for homosexuality. This is not speculation, but a mathematical certainty. If we continue at the current rate, Muslims will become the majority populations in all Western countries, and guess how they’ll vote. Violence that invariably attends Islam will be widespread, filling our streets, just as it does every day in countries with majority Muslim populations.

Of course, the liberal sophist will scoff publically at such an assertion; but one day in the streets of a majority Muslim population is all the proof needed to support it.

To those truly peace loving practitioners of Islam who live among us, and who refuse to follow their Eastern leaders into paths of Jihad, Dar-es-Salaam, Sharia, and cleansing violence, we encircle you in arms of brotherhood and welcome you as fellow-citizens. But we are at the point where we need to receive extremely clear declarations of peace and non-violence from any Muslim that seeks a place among us. To blindly pretend that a rogue elephant is not standing in the middle of the room is a foolish and dangerous path.

PUBLIUS

Feds Retaliate Against Romney Supporters

July 24, 2012 By Editor 3 Comments

Frank VanderSloot is a good man, personally known to the Federalist Press editors in a non-political context for over 30 years.

The hardworking Idaho businessman was recently targeted by the re-elect Obama campaign for giving $1 million to “Restore Our Future” to support Mitt Romney, and his personal information was posted on leftist websites. As a result of being singled out by the administration for his poor taste in presidential candidates Mr. VanderSloot has been harassed, investigated, maligned and threatened by thugs on the left, all in an effort to convince other potential financial supporters that the price of backing Mitt Romney will always include personal destruction.

Mr. VanderSloot’s story was publicized in the press and he blew the whistle on the Obama campaign’s dirty tactics by telling what Obama supporters had been doing to defame him.

Now, in an abuse of power of Orwellian proportions the administration has personally gone after Mr. VanderSloot, serving him with an audit notice from the IRS. Two weeks after receiving the IRS notice, VanderSloot was served notice that the Labor Department would be auditing records related to “foreign employees” working on his Idaho Falls cattle ranch. Suddenly, the Obama Administration is interested in illegal aliens working in the U.S.

Mr. VanderSloot is a longtime supporter of state and national republican campaigns, and serves on the Romney campaign as a co-chairman.

The Obama campaign has not returned press inquiries about their assault on Mr. VanderSloot, and nor have the IRS or Labor Department.
The documents requested by the IRS have been turned over to his accountant, VanderSloot said, and the Labor Department audit is just getting started, but he will fully comply and expects no problems.

Stand firm Frank, Americans support you, and you will be vindicated in November. We have seen this before, and tyrants and despots are eventually overthrown, one way or another.

PUBLIUS

Congressman Nugent On SCOTUS Obamacare Ruling

July 24, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Since the Supreme Court’s ruling on the President’s healthcare law a few weeks ago, a lot of people on both sides of the issue have asked about my reaction to it. It probably goes without saying at this point that I think the law was an enormous mistake from a policy standpoint – $800 billion in new taxes ($675 billion in the most recent estimates by the Joint Committee on Taxation plus roughly another $125 billion in taxes from their 2010 estimates of the individual mandate, employer mandate, and other revenues – likely to go up further), plus $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, zero done to control the growing costs in healthcare, etc – but setting aside the specific issue of health reform, my biggest concerns surround the ruling itself and the precedent it sets. These are issues that frankly, I think the media has a responsibility to make sure Americans are informed about.

Here is the short version. The Supreme Court ruled that the individual mandate requiring Americans to buy health insurance could not be allowed under Congress’ constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. The Court said very plainly that the federal government does not have the authority to require you to buy something and penalize you for failing to do it.

But in the same breath, citing Congress’ authority to levy taxes, the Court said that although the federal government can’t force you to buy health insurance, they can compel you to buy it by taxing you if you don’t. In a nutshell, the government can’t fine you for not buying something, but they can hit you with a tax penalty if you don’t… I frankly don’t see a meaningful difference between the two.

Think about it this way: the federal government has long been able to encourage certain behavior through the tax code (think about the mortgage interest tax deduction), but it has never been able to compel you to go out and buy a house by threatening to hit you with a tax penalty if you didn’t. That is a huge difference. On page 39 of his majority opinion, Chief Justice John Roberts used the example of energy efficient windows. He suggested that although the federal government couldn’t require you to buy energy efficient windows, it could essentially force you to do so by levying a tax on you if you don’t.

I don’t think anybody out there disputes the benefits of having health insurance or lowering your electricity bill, but in the United States of America, those decisions have always been up to the people – not up to the federal government. And regardless of how you feel about the healthcare law, I think this is something that all Americans should consider very carefully. Should Congress have the power to force American citizens into buying things that they don’t want? Should the federal government be able to force you to buy a certain car, or windows, or insurance, or anything else that the Congress thinks you should have? Is that a power that We The People want to surrender?

I don’t believe it is. But that’s what the Supreme Court has done here. Regardless of whether or not the President’s healthcare law is repealed, the precedent has been set. The government now has the legal authority to force you to buy things. That wasn’t the case before the ruling and it is not something that is easily undone. Following on the heels of our Independence Day, when all Americans gather together to celebrate our freedom and the sacrifices of those who made it possible, this is an issue that I think we should all consider very carefully. Are we less free as a people in the wake of this ruling and is that something we should be comfortable with?

You know where I stand.

Congressman Richard B. Nugent

Democrats Destroying Minorities

July 13, 2012 By Editor 1 Comment

As we demonstrated in our article of May 16, 2012, True Champions of American Blacks, the Democratic Party has a long history of doing everything in its power to curtail the advancement of America’s minorities. This destructive assault is well documented in this video>.

What began as a decades-long violent opposition to American blacks and other ethnic and religious minorities (Germans, Italians, Catholics, Mormons, etc.) was eventually transformed into an exploitation campaign wherein blacks and other minorities were converted to a voting coalition with the sudden and wholesale “adoption” of them by the Democratic Party. Indeed, the same party that had blocked voting and civil rights acts fought for by the Republicans in Congress and the White House, now pretended to be the friends and advocates of minorities, promising them social and economic elevation and fulfillment of the American dream—in exchange for their votes and their autonomy.

As a direct result of Democratic policies, American blacks were immediately forced into lifetime welfare status and herded into ghettos called government housing. For decades our black brothers and sisters have endured an assault on their spirit that few could survive, and we have seen the results in cyclical poverty, tens of millions of abortions, the breakdown of the black American family, the wholesale dependency on drugs and alcohol, etc.

We saw a government sign the other day that explained to park visitors that by giving the bears handouts, it would make them dependent on handouts and destroy their ability to provide for themselves and to thrive. This sign was printed by the same government that has made an entire race of Americans entirely dependent on its handouts, and has re-enslaved them in the process.

“We liberals made a terrible mistake, going back 30 years ago. We made a dependent society because we thought we were doing the right thing. We had things like public housing, and we had welfare payments, and all that bred dependence.” Bob Beckel, Liberal Commentator.

So what has the Democratic Party done for American blacks and Hispanics lately?

Since Barack Hussein Obama and his Democrats entirely took over the government just 3.5 years ago, the average American family has lost 40% of its wealth and assets (worse for minorities), with 11 million family homes sinking into the quicksand of foreclosure during Obama’s tenure in office, and the rate climbing fast in 2012, much more of the remaining wealth will be destroyed by the time the next president takes the oath of office.

Since taking office Obama has seen the addition of over 6 million Americans to the poverty rolls, with those on food stamps doubling to 47 million, and unemployment averaging 9%–15.5% if you figure in those who have dropped off the rolls after their 99 weeks of benefits expired and they just gave up.

Which Americans are bearing the brunt of Obama’s socialist takeover? American minorities, of course.

Under Obama we are now suffering the highest, longest-running unemployment rate since the Great Depression. The average unemployment rate under George Bush was 5.2%, and candidate Obama blasted him for that number. President Obama promised Americans that if they would support his $900 billion spending stimulus package, unemployment would sink to less than 5.6%. As with every leftist promise, it was a lie.

Here are some real world numbers of the past 3.5 years that the president can’t spin:

Women in poverty has skyrocketed to 17,000,000, up 800,000
7,500,000 women are in extreme poverty,
25% of Hispanic women are in poverty
2,500,000 women over 65 are in poverty
Most of the job losses under Obama have been women (780,000), who have now left the workforce
Official black unemployment rates are 14.4 (actually much higher)
Official black youth unemployment rates are 40%
Official Hispanic unemployment rates are 11 (actually much higher)

Every week the “New Jobs” reports come out, and with fanfare the administration announces a number like 80,000, which is actually a seasonally adjusted number, not reflective of the reality of the dismal job market, and most of which are mere temp jobs, not career positions with benefits. Those numbers are quietly downgraded every week, uncovered by the mainstream media.

What’s worse, is that population growth demands 200,000 new jobs, just to keep up with the expanding workforce. Obama’s tiresome whining that it is a republican economy, not his, is belied by George Bush’s low unemployment rates, not to mention Ronald Reagan’s million job a month growth at this point in his administration, in a much smaller population and following the horrific economic crash under President Carter and his Democrats.

American Blacks and Hispanics have been led down a dangerous path by the Pied Pipers of the left. Their only hope for a brighter future is to reject the new plantation bosses of the Democratic Party and to move to traditional American values and politics, which provide personal liberty and economic freedom for all.

PUBLIUS

Adult Stem Cell Miracle

July 8, 2012 By Editor 2 Comments

Few appear to understand that stem cells that cure an array of illnesses and conditions have already been discovered, and are being utilized in clinics around the world to heal thousands of patients. The stories that are reported on network news and in other mainstream media outlets about “scientists” working on the development of stem cells are essentially propaganda of Pharmaceutical giants and the political left to hide the truth that “adult” stem cells are here and working.

In our article of May 16, 2012 titled The Stem Cell War is Over, we outlined the political resistance by the current Administration to allow this miraculous new treatment in the U.S., based on the left’s support of embryonic stem cells–a technology that is doomed to fail.

In fact, treatment with “adult” stem cells to replace diseased tissues and dead or dying cells is here. Adult stem cells is a term that is a little confusing, because any stem cell that does not come from a fetus is “adult.” Nonetheless, these stem cells are being used to treat thousands of patients suffering from many diseases and conditions, such as arteriosclerosis, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, rheumatoid arthritis, type 2 diabetes mellitus, autism, muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy and spinal cord injury, to name only a few, are leaving clinics in Panama, Costa Rica and China healthy and often completely cured.

The treatment technology is based on a discovery made in 2003 that isolated adult stem cells. These cells are located in one’s own body fat, where they have been stored in dormancy since the cells were new, or in umbilical cord blood, which until recently has been routinely disposed of as medical waste.

To clarify, stem cells that actually heal are non-embryonic, or “adult” stem cells. The stem cells that we often hear about in mainstream media news reports are embryonic stem cells–cells removed from aborted fetuses and put through an exhaustive and expensive series of modifications to make them suitable for transplanting. These cells are tumorous by nature, and often become cancerous in the recipient’s body, which is why the technology is a massive failure.

The Adult stem cells we are discussing are completely natural, and can be transferred from one patient to another without risk of rejection. The adult stem cells are simply injected into the recipient through an I.V., and they automatically “home” their way to the sick or injured area, and replace the dead or sickly cells. When the bad cells have been replaced, the illness or injury is repaired–permanently, in most cases.

In his new book Cells That Heal Us From Cradle To Grave: A Quantum Leap in Medical Science, Dr. Roger Nocera reveals that this medical science discovery has been developing in medical clinics around the world and proven to be effective in the treatment of many heretofore incurable diseases. Cells That Heal Us From Cradle To Grave explains how this medical science discovery is on a par with Immunology discovered two centuries ago with the smallpox vaccine, and with the discovery of antibiotics a century later. These non-embryonic stem cells have proven to be the answer to many medical problems and will become the solution to our health care cost crisis if the FDA will lift its ban on adult stem cell treatments. Dr. Nocera’s book is a primer on how this amazing new medical technology will transform our current medical health care and pharmaceutical research systems.

Although Americans spend 18% of our GDP on health care, over twice that of most Western countries, we are ranked 72nd in overall health of our citizens by the World Health Organization. As this Healing Cell Quantum Leap in Medical Science becomes widely available Dr. Nocera predicts that the ever rising costs of medical care in this country will diminish significantly and treatments will often actually cure the underlying diseases rather than merely mask the symptoms.

Fox News has recently been running stories about aspects of the new technology, although its full importance and potential ramifications for long term health care costs and prognoses in the U.S. and around the world have not yet been fully examined in those reports.

PUBLIUS

VIDEO: Doctor dying of heart disease is cured with stem cell treatment>

VIDEO: Fox News story and video: Cord Blood Being Used to Save Lives>

VIDEO: Fox News story: Cord Blood Miracle>

Brad Pitt’s Mom Supports Romney

July 6, 2012 By Editor 1 Comment

I have given much thought to Richard Stoecker’s letter (“Vote for Mormon against beliefs,”June 15). I am also a Christian and differ with the Mormon religion.

But I think any Christian should spend much time in prayer before refusing to vote for a family man with high morals, business experience, who is against abortion, and shares Christian conviction concerning homosexuality just because he is a Mormon.

Any Christian who does not vote or writes in a name is casting a vote for Romney’s opponent, Barack Hussein Obama — a man who sat in Jeremiah Wright’s church for years, did not hold a public ceremony to mark the National Day of Prayer, and is a liberal who supports the killing of unborn babies and same-sex marriage.

I hope all Christians give their vote prayerful consideration because voting is a sacred privilege and a serious responsibility.

JANE PITT

Reprinted from New-Leader.com Op-Ed under heading “Election-Casting ballot deserves prayerful consideration”

Growing Dependence Day

July 4, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

With the level of the federal deficit approaching $16,000,000,000 (trillions), the interest on which costs Americans the first $1,200,000,000 they make every day, and the recent explosion of federal power over the citizens and the states as handed to U.S. socialists by the Supreme Court, the independence from government rule and tyranny sought by our Founders is all but neutralized. We and our children are indebted and imprisoned by design of a leftist attack on our country.

A polarization has occurred in the nation—as the left has chipped away at personal liberty and individual sovereignty over the past several decades, those who cherish freedom have finally begun to become more vocal in their resistance. But is it too little, too late? The left has made tremendous inroads in their quest to replace King George with its own elitist panels, commissions and czars, and within the past week its inches of ground winning have become feet.

In the name of laborer parity and elevating the ethnically or socially disadvantaged, the socialists and communists of the past century have robbed the people of the world of their birthright, established by the labor and sacrifice of their 18^th and19^th Century Forbearers. In the name of pretended “fairness” leftist forces have lowered the wealth and opportunities of everyone rather than elevate the status of the less fortunate.

Look at any country where socialism and liberalism have penetrated the veil of liberty. Not one of them has improved the quality of life of their working people.

Where do we find the bottom half of earners in America? With all of the talk of the 1% and the 99% in this country, and the mindless chants of brain-dead occupiers in the streets, even an overtaxed economy like ours has rendered our own 99% the 1% of the world. Nearly all of our poor live in good housing, have clean water and food aplenty, a computer of some kind, and cell phones and cable television. They live better than the royalty of many of the earth’s nations.

Additionally, the tremendous generosity and military might of Americans has been the salvation of billions of people around the world, whose leftist economies have left them with nothing but squalor, want and exposure to dictators and war lords (usually leftists).

We hear of the Tea Party these days, and the name is spoken with disdain by over half of the country, and almost all of the mainstream media. Does any of them actually recall where the term originated? Do they remember how an oppressive monarch imposed taxes that were hard to bear and intruded into the personal liberties of a hardworking people, and that those people finally decided that they would take no more and rose up in rebellion, starting with throwing British tea into the harbor?

No, sadly enough, most young adults these days are the products of a dumbing-down campaign launched by the left and its educational arm, the National Education Association. They have mush for brains and their education consists of nothing more than pop culture and global warming propaganda.

We have nearly come full circle. We have hundreds of millions dependent on government and its handouts, a White House dedicated to the overthrow of the Constitution, and a Supreme Court has decreed that the people are to be taxed even for services they DO NOT purchase at the government’s command.

King George is back, liberty has been strangled to near enslavement, and this time it will take more than a few muskets to rid us of the burgeoning oppression. America has not seen such dark times since the Civil War. I say the Civil War, because in all other wars the enemy was external. If we fail to immediately change our course, we will be irretrievably carried back under the oppression of dictatorship. We invite all liberty loving Americans to join the revolution, and to regain our independence from oppressive, centralized government.

PUBLIUS

Benedict Roberts and Stare Decisis

July 2, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts exploded from the closet last week, revealing himself for the undercover leftist that he is, forever propelling the US into an Orwellian nightmare of government control and loss of personal liberty.

As the White House braced for a Supreme Court ruling on its Health Care legislation, which is not only extremely unpopular among voters, but had been telegraphed as facially unconstitutional by a majority of the Court in oral arguments, only a few die-hard socialists believed the act would be upheld upon judicial review by the Court. White House spokesman Jay Carney was already carrying out the left’s Talking Points Memo agenda of trying to saddle the GOP with the idea of the unconstitutional mandate, which forced Americans to buy a government mandated commodity, or suffer a penalty for disobedience.

The usual luke-warm judicial slug on the Court, Justice Kennedy, was thought to be the only conservative-leaning justice with the poor judgment to actually consider such an expansion of government power. He had made it clear during oral arguments, however, that even he was opposed to such an exponentially compounded expansion of government intrusion into the lives of American citizens. As the ruling came down, all of us, left and right, were shocked that Chief Justice John Roberts had actually made himself the swing vote to uphold the draconian law, shifting heretofore unconstitutional powers to the federal government.

Since that fateful day last week we have heard members of the left and their media propaganda outlets spiking the ball in celebration. We have simultaneously heard those on the right analyzing Justice Roberts’ written majority opinion, incredulous, sifting for some scintilla of logic or constitutional authority to make some sort of sense of it all. Perhaps the dear boy was telegraphing a method of ensuring Obama’s defeat in November, we have heard.

In fact, no such response for the ruling is possible. What many pundits fail to understand is the concept of stare decisis. This is the principle that once the Court has decided a constitutional principle, it remains decided–forever!

Indeed, the law of the land will always be that the federal government has no restrictions on what it can force the American people and the states to do, as long as it can be imposed under the taxing authority. The implications of this contorted theory of constitutional law cannot be overstated. The long-term ramifications of this unmitigated power shift are incomprehensible, and WILL become a source of unspeakable sorrow for this people in years and decades to come.

The Constitution written by our Founding Fathers is no more. The Tenth Amendment is dead.

Now, we are at the fork in the road. We either follow Obama and his socialists down the path they offer, or we turn them out of office, forever, and put those into office who value the personal liberty we obtained and fought to maintain in every war since the Revolution.

Perhaps the time has inexorably arrived that we must re-invoke the wisdom of one of those Founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
Thomas Jefferson

The Biggest Tax Increase In History!

June 28, 2012 By Editor 7 Comments

Barack Hussein Obama has promised the American people on numerous occasions that he would not increase taxes on any American or American family earning less than $250,000 a year. When pressed for clarification and commitment, his response has been a consistent No New Taxes, reminiscent of Bush I’s “Read My Lips.”

“I can make a firm pledge: under my plan no family making less than two-hundred-fifty-thousand dollars a year will see any form of tax increase.”

Video: Barack Obama Pledges Not to Raise Taxes

The president and his congressional leaders on the left specifically pitched his health care act as not being a tax. They claimed vehemently that it was not a tax, and ridiculed conservatives who said it was indeed a tax. They insisted that Obamacare was constitutional pursuant to the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

Then, of course, as soon as the administration got in front of the supreme court they began claiming that Obamacare was indeed a tax. The argument seemed ridiculous if not ingenuous in light of all of the left’s posturing and protesting that it was not a tax.

Today the supreme court announced that Obamacare passes constitutional scrutiny because it is . . . A TAX!

And not just a tax. As a tax, Obamacare is the biggest tax increase in the history of the U.S. Will it increase the taxes of Americans earning less than $250,000 a year? YES!!!

Of course, the upshot is that President Obama and all of those on the left who forced Obamacare down America’s collective throat were lying. It was indeed a tax. It was a Trojan Horse. It was subterfuge on the scale of a stolen revolution, or of a communist power takeover.

Today is a day of decision for the American people. Each of us must ask ourselves the questions:

Are we ready to join the left in its march toward socialism?
Or do we take back our country today?

There is no longer any middle ground. The die is cast, and we either end the government’s expansion into every aspect of our lives, and shut down 90 percent of the bureaucracy and rein back entitlements to a safety net level, or we capitulate to Obama and the left and allow the federal government to completely take over.

Video: Barack Obama Pledges Not to Raise Taxes In Any Form

Romney HAS an Economic Plan

June 22, 2012 By Editor 6 Comments

We are surprised each time we hear that presidential candidate Mitt Romney needs to come up with an economic plan if he wants to distinguish himself from President Obama–who has proved he has no economic plan. Certainly, throwing trillions of taxpayer and borrowed dollars at his friends’ companies and organizations has resulted in nothing but record high unemployment rates, burgeoning deficits, and economic downturns.

So does Mitt Romney have a plan to reinvigorate the US economy? Indeed, on his campaign’s website his plan is laid out quite clearly: “Mitt Romney will rebuild the foundations of the American economy on the principles of free enterprise, hard work, and innovation.”

Also, Romney has very clearly stated that his “plan seeks to reduce taxes, spending, regulation, and government programs. It seeks to increase trade, energy production, human capital, and labor flexibility. It relinquishes power to the states instead of claiming to have the solution to every problem.”

In other words, Mitt Romney’s plan is the exact plan that the founders put into place for America through its Constitution; the same plan that elevated our nation from a mere agricultural colony to a major world leader in every category and kept us there for several decades–until the left began its socialistic experiments with our economy.

So why the debate over whether or not Romney even has a plan? Because to the main stream media and the entire left, if the government isn’t managing every aspect of the economy, forcing its will on the people and taking their money and liberty in the process, it is no plan at all. Indeed, centralized control of production, distribution, and labor is the very essence of socialistic government, and it has NEVER succeeded, not anywhere or at any time in the world’s history. This kind of troubled thinking is exactly what got the country into its current mess.

When Obama sidesteps blame for the current state of the economy, he refers to President Bush and republicans in general and says that they are the guys who did this to our economy. Is this true? The truth is that our economy was in a recession when George Bush (II) took office. Later that year the economy took a serious hit with the 9/11 terrorist attacks, shutting down major portions of American transportation and industry. Democratic policies forcing lenders to extend unsecured loans to unqualified borrowers is what has led to the greatest downturn in the US economy since the Great Depression. Democratic high taxes and burdensome over-regulation have crippled our economy, and to the extent republicans have been willing to go along with these democratic policies, they must share responsibility for the problems they have caused.

Lowering taxes always floods the economy with capital–as happened under Presidents Kennedy and Reagan. That is the stimulus that will put Americans back to work–which will be great news to the 15.5% that are currently unemployed or underemployed, and for the rest who are waiting for a raise.

Yes, Mitt Romney has a plan to revitalize the American economy, the American Plan, and anyone who wants to see America come back from the brink would be wise to support his candidacy.

PUBLIUS

The Audacity of Arrogance

June 17, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Community Organizer Barack Hussein Obama released his first book about himself in 1995, titled Dreams from My Father, as publicity to launch his Senatorial campaign. The book has only recently received any scrutiny, and reveals a very disturbing ideology and series of life choices in the form of socialist associations and heavy drug use of the would-be leader.

Obama’s second book about himself, The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream, was then written and released by Senator Barack Hussein Obama, as publicity to launch his presidential campaign. The reader quickly learns that Obama’s version of the American Dream is much different than that of the average American.

The promises made to the American people in Obama’s campaigns turn out to bear no resemblance to his actions in office: There would be no rise in taxes for anyone under $250,000 per year, Obamacare would not raise the cost of health care and those who preferred their own plan would not lose it. Also, Gitmo would be closed down and the wars in the middle east would be turned off like a spigot. Or here’s a good one . . . his administration would be the most transparent of any, and the partisan rhetoric would end. How about this one—Obama would cut the federal deficit in half!? In fact, of all of the promises made by candidate Obama, Pulitzer Prize winning Politifact.com of the Tampa Bay Times demonstrates that he has reneged on two-thirds.

No doubt, many of the broken campaign promises were leftist pipe-dreams and would be devastating to the country, and with thankful hearts we recognize that President Obama got a taste of reality on several fronts once he took office, and began to see the world from a more realistic viewpoint, carrying on many of the policies of the Bush administration, notwithstanding the venomous denunciation of those policies by Obama and the left beforehand.

The fact remains, however, that Obama is an ideologue, and his political thinking is much different than that of most American’s, and completely the opposite of the founders of our nation.

Notwithstanding his adoption of some less radical paths once in office, Obama has still been guilty of ignoring the will of the American people on several issues, and has comported himself more like a ruler in many regards, than a public servant—as he was elected to be.

Something the president fails to understand is that the American people do not want him to rule over them like a dictator. Ruling by executive order, as Obama has done on several occasions, most recently in the case of granting amnesty to illegal aliens, circumvents the constitution, making Obama an official enemy of the Constitution, and of the people it protects. During the Obamacare debate in congress the republicans attempted to discuss the unconstitutional portions of the act, inclusions not supported by a clear majority of Americans. While Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi in classic Orwellian-speak passed off debate with the left’s curt, “We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it,” Obama’s response was more draconian in tone: “We won, you lost,” so just sit down and shut the hell up.

The administration has refused to accept responsibility for its many failures and shortcomings, and has stonewalled congressional attempts to get at the heart of corruption and unlawful activities in Eric Holder’s Department of Justice as well as other agencies under the administration.

It is the president’s arrogance over the past three and a half years that has alienated those supporters who bought into his “civil tone” and hope and change campaign promises. His loss of personal likeability and following Mitt Romney in the polls at this point in the election does not bode well for his re-election bid.

If the president has any Hope to remain in office for another four years, he absolutely must Change his attitude. The American people got rid of King George, and if pushed too far, they’ll do likewise with any other person who sets himself up as a dictator.

PUBLIUS

Obama’s Middle Class is Not America’s Middle Class

June 15, 2012 By Editor 2 Comments

We who have watched the transformation of America’s political landscape over the past few decades better understand what has been lost than newcomers to the scene. There have been changes, and many, and most for the worse.

The left’s drumbeat, from the beginning and in all countries they have infiltrated and destroyed has been that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Is that true? And if so, what is the real cause?

We hear President Obama speak of his unrivaled protection of the “middle class,” as though he invented the idea of the middle class.

Who is the middle class in America? It used to be that it consisted of the majority core of the hard working people who were fulfilling their version of the American Dream—education for children, home ownership, predictable and comfortable retirement, etc. These have traditionally been the majority of the country, tax payers who did their fair share, and wouldn’t take handouts as long as they were able-bodied. Is this the “middle class” of which President Obama now speaks and claims to represent?

In fact, it is no secret that nearly half of all Americans contribute nothing these days to federal income taxes. Is this Obama’s middle class? Certainly, a tax scheme that requires no contributions from half the population is either backed by an incredibly strong economy, has extremely low tax rates, or is grossly unfair in its distribution of the tax burden. In our case, it is the last. In our May 10, 2012 article Bringing Fairness to Taxes we demonstrated that relatively few Americans shoulder the heavy burden of America’s spending addiction, with the top 25 percent of earners paying 87 percent of the total burden, and what can’t be squeezed out of them is merely bought on credit, creating an inevitable collision course with economic Armageddon.

We are compelled to ask the question, if the bottom half of the country doesn’t contribute to the federal income tax base, who is in the middle class? Shouldn’t the middle class be somewhere in the middle? We instinctively imagine that the middle class would consist of those above the bottom, and below the top, forming a bell curve. Although a bell curve is a technical concept with many possible variables, if we are in a class being graded on a bell curve, we would expect that there is a top 20%, a bottom 20%, and 60% distributed throughout the “middle.” There is our true middle class.

In our historical social structure, indeed, we had 1) the wealthy, who got that way through risk taking investment, hard work, or inheriting from one of those, 2) the less fortunate or poor, and 3) the 60% in the middle who worked hard to get an education, pursue a career, buy a home, educate their children, and retire comfortably. In most cases, the upper 80% provided aid and assistance to the bottom 20%, enabling millions to be elevated out of poverty—something our left leaning government has entirely failed to do with $ trillions.

Although we still hear much of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, the truth is that since Obama took office, the average American family has lost 40% of its net worth—rich, middle class and poor. With 11 million family homes sinking into the quicksand of foreclosure during Obama’s tenure in office, and the rate climbing fast in 2012, much more of the remaining wealth will be destroyed by the time the next president takes the oath of office. Since taking office Obama has seen the addition of over 6 million Americans to the poverty rolls, with those on food stamps doubling to 47 million, and unemployment averaging 9%.

No, Obama’s rainbow coalition of supporters is not the middle class. It is heavily weighted to that portion of the population that has nothing to lose by raising the taxes on the portion who actually pay all of the taxes, or by spending the income of future generations. It is made up of those who are not part of the historic middle class, but instead those with ideological or racial axes to grind.

Divide and conquer has been the method of despots from the beginning, and the left divides Americans from the middle class by telling groups that their interests are adverse to those of other groups, but that if they all assemble under the umbrella of the Democratic party, their unity will give them political strength.

The scheme has been successful, from the viewpoint of the left and its insatiable appetite for power, but it has come at the expense of the middle class’s American Dream.

It is time for Americans to come together and to reject the lies of the left. We are not a splintered nation with adverse interests that set us against one another, but a unified group seeking what our middle class forbearers sought—liberty, peace and prosperity, with everyone pulling his own weight and contributing to the whole. We should be looking to politicians who believe in the America of Washington, Jefferson, Jay, Franklin, and all those who sacrificed so much so that we would have the opportunity to choose freedom and prosperity over the servitude and poverty offered by Obama’s left.

PUBLIUS

Born This Way?

June 13, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

On June 10, we reprinted an article from The Weed that we titled Gay Confession – Loving The Straight Life, in which a happily married father of three explains that in spite of his same sex attraction, he chooses to live a normal life, and finds it entirely satisfying . . . emotionally, spiritually and sexually.

The article is very revealing, and should be used as a primer for every person and organization that reaches out to people with same sex attraction.

The left has adopted gay people as one of their rainbow coalition special interest groups, and everyone from the president to Hollywood types to screaming Occupy anarchists agree that there is only one possible life path for someone who has a natural same sex attraction—engage sexually with those of the same sex.

The editors of the Federalist Press were inundated with a barrage of ugly comments for reprinting the article, most of which merely claimed that the article was a hoax, but many of which claimed that some sort of coercion was brought to bear or that the editors are actually closeted gays with more empathy than sympathy for those who bear this burden.

America’s brainwashing on the subject of homosexuality is complete. The subject has been so shoved down our throats (what can we say?) and the orthodoxy of the lifestyle so thoroughly ingrained in our collected psyche that anyone who dares step out of line and asks a question is immediately shouted down with mean-spirited epithets—a common practice of the pro-free-speech left.

Let us pose a thought . . . one that has not been dictated by the government or disseminated by its media outlets . . . that perhaps those who have natural inclinations toward same sex attraction don’t need to pursue those inclinations. Oh, what hell there will be to pay for such a concept in such modern and tolerant times . . . but just hear me out.

We have many behaviors, which, even in our decaying society, are still considered to be abhorrent. For instance, there are the pedophiles. These are people who have a natural sexual attraction to children. Do we as a society say to them, “Well, because your sexual attraction to children is natural, then go right ahead and have them sexually at your leisure”? In fact, we don’t.

One might say, we don’t allow that because it is wrong to impose an adult’s will over a child’s will, especially in such a critical area (notwithstanding the millions of children who lose out to adults’ “choice” every year and end up getting flushed in a medical waste bag). If that is true, then what about those who have a natural sexual attraction to animals? Yes, bestiality is quite alive and thriving in many quarters. Do we say to those who are different than ourselves in their sexual desires, “No, you may not satisfy your sexual lusts with critters around the yard?” In fact, we do. There are very few places where one can freely engage in sexual activity with animals.

In fact, a viable society puts many restrictions on the sexual behaviors of its members, notwithstanding the many and varied natural inclinations of those members to the contrary. Is this wrong? Perhaps we need to rethink the entire proposition. Perhaps we should follow our heroic president (yes, he had the courage to come out of the closet for gays and collect $ millions from Hollywood, and he gunned down Bin Laden at great personal risk) and broaden the scope of marriage to all of those whose tastes for sex differ from the norm. Marriage between men and boys is at the top of the list for NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association) members, and marriage between people and farm animals and house pets would suit thousands.

Yes, rethinking our entire underlying moral and social philosophy is something that an enlightened society like ours must do if we are to follow our president and his social engineers on the left. In fact, all great societies have done so . . . just before collapsing, as we are doing now.

The editors laud all of those who seek to live healthy, fulfilling lives, despite any burden that they may be called upon to bear. Life is not easy, for any of us. We all bear secret burdens that those around us know little or nothing of. An overwhelming desire to bed a favorite movie star? Must society encourage that sexual inclination? Or perhaps an insatiable appetite for Big Gulps, or Big Macs. Of course, the government is there to save us from ourselves when it comes to those choices.

If we were to all follow the 1960s chant of the left, “If it feels good, do it,” we would have already disintegrated into a drug-riddled, immoral, godless, self-absorbed, child-aborting, socialistic . . . oh. Perhaps the president is correct . . . marry anyone or anything, and never go against your natural inclinations. Rising above your natural circumstances and proclivities and becoming a better person is old fashioned.

PUBLIUS

NEA Report Card: F

June 11, 2012 By Editor 1 Comment

We hear constantly about how American students are losing ground in worldwide performance standards. We score around 500 out of 1,000 in a number of important categories like reading and science.

Every three years the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) report is compiled and released, comparing the knowledge and skills of 15-year-olds in 70 countries around the world. The United States ranks 14th of 34 OECD countries for reading skills, 17th for science, and a dismal 25th for mathematics.

The man-on-the-street interview has become common fodder for comedy shows, because the ignorance of the average American is overwhelmingly predictable. If you don’t believe it, casually ask someone in Starbucks the most fundamental of social studies questions: how many senators are in the US congress, or even the name of the vice president. You will be surprised at the number of blank stares you receive.

The Dumbing Down of America

So what do children learn in schools under the stern directives of the National Education Association? They learn about global warming, necessary tolerance for abhorrent human behaviors, and about how bad President Bush was. They are taught to speak out vehemently against anything and everything that is traditional or moral, and to blindly embrace every edict and dogma of the left.

Our classrooms are often filled with NEA union “change agents,” set in place to transition impressionable minds from logical and moral thought to leftist nonsense of redistribution and “fairness.” Our children don’t dare question the dogmatic edicts of these “community organizers” whose job it is to preach the gospel of the left, numbing the minds of the children and getting them to thoughtlessly repeat the chants and talking points of liberals.

Even in conservative Provo, Utah, we’ve received reports of a female seventh-grade teacher who recently bullied a female student in front of the class for having a note in her papers on the desk that she was supporting Mitt Romney for president. When the girl’s father asked the principal why his daughter was berated in front of the entire class and called “stupid” for her written thought, he was threatened with a lawsuit and a restraining order if he mentioned the incident outside of the principal’s office.

With all of that “education” going on, it’s no wonder that there is no time or energy left over for things like reading, writing and arithmetic.

“This is an absolute wake-up call for America,” U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in an interview with The Associated Press. “The results are extraordinarily challenging to us and we have to deal with the brutal truth. We have to get much more serious about investing in education.”

Does Education Need More Money?

Duncan’s use of the word “investing” is liberal-speak for raising taxes and feeding the NEA with more money to donate to Democratic candidate political campaigns. In fact, where students are more likely to drop out of school, and to be unemployed when they leave school, we find the highest levels of NEA influence, and the highest support for Democrats. Think east coast and west coast cities, Chicago, Detroit, etc.

Indeed, we constantly hear how underpaid teachers are, and how our schools need more money for the classrooms. Let’s look at some real numbers. First, we spend more than $9,000 per student per year on K-12 education (far more than all the countries who beat us in PISA reports), totaling over $120,000 per student by high school graduation. That is over $800 billion annually, which is a full 4.5% of our gross domestic product.

So where does all of this money go? Around 60% goes to classroom instruction, including teachers’ salaries. The rest (40%) goes to non-teaching employees and extras, in place mainly to ensure federal compliance, to qualify for the small percentage of the local budget that comes from Washington, D.C.

According to U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, mechanical engineers earn $31.93 per hour, but public school teachers earn on average more than $34.00 per hour, with an average annual salary of over $47,000. That salary is for a job that consumes just 36.5 hours per week compared with many hours more for nearly everyone else. Compared with public school teachers, editors and reporters earn 24% less; architects, 11% less; psychologists, 9% less; chemists, 5% less; mechanical engineers, 6% less; and economists, 1% less. It is true that there are those who earn more than public school teachers. Nuclear engineers earn 17% more; actuaries, 9% more; and physicists, 3% more. There are public school teachers working for a number of failing school systems who are earning a lot more than most people. The Detroit metropolitan area has the highest average public school teacher pay among metropolitan areas for which data are available, at $47.28 per hour, followed by the San Francisco metropolitan area at $46.70 per hour, and the New York metropolitan area at $45.79 per hour.

We need to invest more? No, we need to take back control of our schools and ensure that motivated teachers are teaching basic educational courses—the kind of subjects that are tested and measured internationally. We need to make sure there is competition in the teaching profession, something the NEA has fought with tremendous ferocity. We need to reward teachers who excel, and fire teachers who aren’t teaching useful subject matter to our children.

PUBLIUS

Gay Confession – Loving The Straight Life

June 10, 2012 By Editor 6 Comments

Reprinted from The Weed:

Club Unicorn: In which I come out of the closet on our ten year anniversary

Hi guys.

Lolly and I are sitting by a pool in the blazing sun, tanning our Seattle-white skin. We are having the time of our lives. Our kids are being watched by their Aunt Kati and Uncle Blake while we relax, celebrating ten incredible years of marriage.

And, side by side, we are finishing the final details of this post which we have written together over the course of the last month.

This is a different post than what you’re used to seeing here on The Weed. If you are here to laugh and read something light-hearted and fun, you probably want to skip this one. It’s long. And it’s serious. And I won’t be offended by anyone who decides to wait until things get light-hearted again.

This is the post where I tell you that I, Josh Weed, am homosexual.

I need to clarify a couple of things.

First, I think it’s important to clarify that although The Weed is a humor blog, this post is not a joke. This isn’t satire. This is not aimed to get laughs. I promise. This is completely serious, and it is us being completely real and genuine on a subject that is very personal and very dear to our hearts.

Second, I need to clarify that this post is written from the standpoint of a devout, believing Mormon and addresses topics seen within the Mormon and broader Christian community. Please forgive us if our focus feels unfamiliar, or feels totally incongruent with the rest of the posts on this blog.

I guess the premise of this post is to share that not only am I homosexual, but I’m also a devout and believing Mormon. And that I’m very happily married to a woman, and have been for ten years now.
And for the first time, we’re talking about it publicly.

When we do tell people about this—and we’ve been telling a lot of people lately, so we’ve gotten really practiced at it—they usually have a lot of really good, genuine questions. Here are some of the questions we’re most frequently asked (there really should be an acronym for that—I know! I’ll call it a FAQ!). We hope answering these questions will help you understand how we make sense of this delicate and complicated issue in our lives.

1. Why have you decided to share this information?

We have several reasons for opening up about this part of our lives. First and foremost, my clinical work as a therapist is taking me in the direction of helping clients who struggle to reconcile their sexual orientation with their religious beliefs. I have decided to be open with these clients about my own homosexuality, and in doing so have opened the door to people finding out about this in ways I can’t control. Therefore, we thought it would be wise to be the ones who told those we love about this part of our lives. Posting on the blog was the simplest way to make sure that happened as it would be impossible to sit all of the people we have known and loved in our lives down and share this personally.

The second reason is that the issue of homosexuality is not very well understood. We wanted to add our voice and experience to the dialogue taking place about this very sensitive issue.

Thirdly, I (Josh) feel the desire to be more open regarding this part of my identity. I have found that sharing this part of me allows my relationships with others to be more authentic. It has deepened my friendships and enhanced my interactions, and it has also helped me to feel more accepted by others as it allows others the opportunity to choose to accept me for who I really am.

2. What do you mean when you say you’re “gay”?

When I say I am gay or homosexual or same-sex attracted (and I use these terms interchangeably, which is a personal decision) I refer specifically to sexual orientation. I am sexually attracted to men. I am not sexually attracted to women. It is very simple. I have many, many years of experience which confirm this to be true, but it’s really as simple as what a girl asked me* in junior high—and I’m sorry if this is a little blunt, but I’ve never found a question that cuts to the heart of the matter more effectively— “so, if everyone in this room took off their clothes, would you be turned on by the girls or the guys?” My answer, which I didn’t say out loud, was unquestionably the guys. And it was unquestionably not the girls. And that still is my answer. It’s really not very complicated. Most people just don’t think about their sexual orientation because they don’t have any reason to.

*Why did a girl ask me that question in junior high? Because a bully actively spread a rumor around the entire school that I was a “woman trapped in a man’s body.” This was unbelievably horrific and traumatizing, and I was harassed every single day about it, often by perfect strangers. I was more effeminate, played the violin, didn’t play sports, was never interested in girls and didn’t hang out with guys, and so people glommed onto that rumor and ruthlessly harassed me for the entire year, culminating in a yearbook filled with breathtakingly insensitive taunts. Being the gay kid is really, really hard in junior high. If you know a gay kid in junior high, give them a hug and tell them you love them. I assure you they could use it.

3. When did you know you were gay?

I knew I was gay when I was 11 or 12. That’s the onset of puberty, when humans begin to feel sexual attractions. For a little while I was waiting for the attraction to girls to set in because that’s what everyone said would happen, but then there was a sinking moment of realization—a thought like “oh, this thing for guys is its replacement.” I told my parents shortly thereafter, when it seemed pretty clear that my sexuality wasn’t playing a trick on me, and the girl thing wasn’t going to happen, but the guy thing was totally happening. I was 13 when I told my dad (a member of the Stake Presidency—which is a lay leader in the Mormon church—at the time). My parents were incredibly loving and supportive, which is part of why I believe I’m so well adjusted today. They deserve serious props for being so loving and accepting—I never felt judged or unwanted or that they wished to change anything about me. That’s part of why I have never been ashamed about this part of myself. (I feel plenty of shame about other irrational things, like the fact that I can’t catch a ball or change a tire (as you may have noticed on the blog)—and I’m working on that stuff because toxic shame isn’t a good thing. But I’ve never been shameful about who I am, or about this feature of me as a critical part of my person, which it is in the same way that sexuality is a critical part of any person.)

4. If you’re married to a woman, how can you really be gay?

This is a really good question and I can see how people can be confused about it. Some might assume that because I’m married to a woman, I must be bisexual. This would be true if sexual orientation was defined by sexual experience. Heck, if sexual orientation were defined by sexual experience, I would be as straight as the day is long even though I’ve never been turned on by a Victoria’s Secret commercial in my entire life. Sexual orientation is defined by attraction, not by experience. In my case, I am attracted sexually to men. Period. Yet my marriage is wonderful, and Lolly and I have an extremely healthy and robust sex life. How can this be?

The truth is, what people are really asking with the above question is “how can you be gay if your primary sex partner is a girl?” I didn’t fully understand the answer to this question until I was doing research on sexuality in grad school even though I had been happily married for almost five years at that point. I knew that I was gay, and I also knew that sex with my wife was enjoyable. But I didn’t understand how that was happening. Here is the basic reality that I actually think many people could use a lesson in: sex is about more than just visual attraction and lust and it is about more than just passion and infatuation. I won’t get into the boring details of the research here, but basically when sex is done right, at its deepest level it is about intimacy. It is about one human being connecting with another human being they love. It is a beautiful physical manifestation of two people being connected in a truly vulnerable, intimate manner because they love each other profoundly. It is bodies connecting and souls connecting. It is beautiful and rich and fulfilling and spiritual and amazing. Many people never get to this point in their sex lives because it requires incredible communication, trust, vulnerability, and connection. And Lolly and I have had that from day one, mostly because we weren’t distracted by the powerful chemicals of infatuation and obsession that usually bring a couple together (which dwindle dramatically after the first few years of marriage anyway). So, in a weird way, the circumstances of our marriage allowed us to build a sexual relationship that is based on everything partners should want in their sex-life: intimacy, communication, genuine love and affection. This has resulted in us having a better sex life than most people I personally know. Most of whom are straight. Go fig.

5. Did your wife know you were gay when you married her?

Yes. I told Lolly about my homosexuality when I was 16 and we were on a date. In fact, I recently just wrote a humor post about that day. Here it is: vomit—a story of romance. That may have been the most important day (and was definitely the most important date) of my life. Everything I have in life that I cherish—the love of my life, my career, my education, coming home to three beautiful daughters screaming “Daddy, daddy!” with glee—hinged on that fateful day at Pizza Hut, and on a wonderful girl who was compassionate and open-minded and willing to listen to a young gay kid who was lonely and desperate for a soft landing place and to be heard.

Well… I’ve actually published an essay which tells the whole story in an anthology published by Deseret Book. Here the book is, if you’re interested:

The book was compiled by my friend Ty Mansfield, and my essay is called “An Unlikely Gift” under my old pseudonym, Jason Lockhart. For this post, we’ve had Lolly tell our story below.

In fact, let’s do her question next:

6. Why would your wife choose to marry someone who is gay?

Hey guys. I never thought that the first guest post I wrote on “The Weed” would be talking about how I fell in love with gay Weed. But I definitely want to share my part of our story. So, here it goes.

I have known Josh and loved him for a very, very long time. We met when we were very small children. We lived on the same street in Utah and his dad was my Bishop (ecclesiastical lay-leader of an LDS congregation). When we were younger, we were acquaintances. In junior high we started eating lunch together and grew to be friends. I found him amusing and I enjoyed being around him.

After 9th grade, my family moved to Portland, Oregon. I thought of Josh Weed occasionally but never did anything about it until his family moved to the same city in Oregon two years later. We both thought it would be fun to reconnect, so we went on our first date.

And that is when Josh told me that he was gay. I was the first person he told, aside from his own parents. I will never forget the look on his face during the first moments of that conversation. From that look, I knew that he was feeling extremely vulnerable in what he had just shared and that what he was dealing with was very hard and very real for him. Knowing Josh’s beliefs in our church, the first question that came to my mind was “What are you going to do about it?”

We talked at length that night about the reality of being gay in the Mormon Church. He told me that he believed in the doctrine of the Church and that he wanted to do what God wanted him to do. During the course of that conversation, my mind became overwhelmed by the complexities of the issue he was facing. And how alone he felt in facing them.

I was determined to be an ally and friend to him in regards to this issue. I can’t even recall all of the conversations we had, but we spent hours and hours over the course of years hammering out what this issue meant in general and what it meant for him. Why was he gay? What did God expect him to do? Etc.

Josh’s commitment to God was so apparent to me as we discussed the choices ahead of him. My admiration and respect deepened immensely for him. We spent a lot of time together and I loved being with him. Our friendship grew and grew. And I truly loved him. He told me that he wanted to go on a mission for the church and that he would also like to get married and have a family. I believed that those things were possible for him, but I never thought it would be with me.

The possibility of us becoming more than friends would come up every now and then, but I would dismiss it quickly. My parents did an amazing job in teaching their children about the proper role of sexuality. In our home, sex was viewed as sacred, enjoyable, and something to look forward to in marriage. I saw the important role that intimacy played in successful marriages and that was one aspect of marriage that I was greatly anticipating. Therefore, in my mind, marrying someone gay was completely out of the question.

I remember one conversation in particular in which Josh said, “If YOU won’t consider marrying me, then who will?” I responded with, “I’m sure there is someone out there for you. It’s just not me. Maybe you need to find someone who doesn’t care about sex.” He thought that line of thinking was wrong, but I couldn’t think of another solution for him.

Years continued to pass. Josh’s first year at college, he got a girlfriend. Who also happened to be my best friend. I loved both of them very much and was very happy for them. Yet, something unexpected happened. I started to feel jealous. They ended up breaking up shortly after the semester ended, but the feelings of jealousy that I had experienced in regards to their relationship threw me off guard. I started to seriously examine my feelings for Josh.

In a moment of honest reflection, I realized that Josh was everything that I wanted in a husband. (All except for the huge fact that he was gay.) He was dedicated to God above all else and he loved his Savior deeply. He was kind, funny, sincere, honest and so much fun. I connected with him in ways that I did not connect with anyone else. But he was gay. And I did not know if I could handle that in a marriage.

I ended up confessing my feelings to him on a random day on a whim. He admitted that he felt the same feelings for me. That I was everything he wanted in a wife. I had never been more excited or confused. We decided to try it out and to start dating. It was truly an amazing experience for both of us, falling in love with our best friend.

Before he left on his mission, I was still not sure if I could actually marry him. The intimacy factor was so important to me. During the course of dating, we held hands and kissed. It was promising, but I didn’t know if our chemistry would be enough.

One day, we were having a conversation about our relationship. He simply said, “Am I worth it to you?” I wasn’t quite sure what he meant by that question. We then talked about how no one is perfect and how everyone deals with his or her own set of imperfections. When you get married, you are accepting a person as a package deal—the good, the bad, the hard, the amazing and the imperfect. He wanted to know if I loved the rest of him enough that I could deal with the realities that his homosexuality would bring to our marriage. I honestly could not answer him then.

Months passed and I was having a conversation with a good friend of mine. I said to her, “I can find someone else like Josh, right? Someone else to love like I love him?” She said, “You could find someone else to love, sure. But you will never have what you and Josh have with someone else. Because no one else is Josh.” When she said that, and I thought of loving someone else, I knew the answer to his question “Am I worth it?”

I knew that I loved Josh. I loved All of him. I wanted to marry him. I wanted to marry Josh Weed because I loved the man that he was. I loved everything that made him him. I didn’t want anyone else. I knew that we had the kind of relationship that could work through hard trials and circumstances. I had faith in him and I had faith in our love. I did not choose to marry someone who is gay. I chose to marry Josh Weed, the man that I love, and to accept all of him. I have never regretted it.

I love this man.

Okay, next question, and Josh will take over again. If you’re still reading, I’m impressed!

7. Why do you not choose to be “true to yourself” and live the gay lifestyle?

First of all, I understand that when people refer to a “gay lifestyle” they are talking about a lifestyle that includes gay romantic and sexual relationships. But I want to point out that because I am gay, any lifestyle I choose is technically a “gay lifestyle.” Mine just looks different than other gay peoples’. My hope is that other gay people will be as accepting of my choices as they hope others would be of their choices.

But that doesn’t really answer the question. And it is an important question.

One of the sad truths about being homosexual is that no matter what you decide for your future, you have to sacrifice something. It’s very sad, but it is true. I think this is true of life in general as well. If you decide to be a doctor, you give up any of the myriad of other things you could have chosen. But with homosexuality, the choices seem to be a little bit more mutually exclusive. If you are Mormon and you choose to live your religion, you are sacrificing the ability to have a romantic relationship with a same-sex partner. If you choose a same-sex partner, you are sacrificing the ability to have a biological family with the one you love. And so on. No matter what path you choose, if you are gay you are giving up something basic, and sometimes various things that are very basic. I chose not to “live the gay lifestyle,” as it were, because I found that what I would have to give up to do so wasn’t worth the sacrifice for me. The things I wasn’t willing to part with were the following:

1. I believe the doctrine of the Mormon Church is true. One of the key doctrines of the church is that “marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.” Another is that “children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.” These are things I personally believe. I also believe, and my experience has shown me time and time again, that when I follow the teachings that I know to be true my life is blessed and I find immense joy and peace. I feel that this joy and peace is a direct result of my connection to God’s spirit as a result of living in a way He approves of.

Deciding not to give this up–these profound spiritual beliefs that I feel in the deepest parts of my soul to be true–in favor of my sexual orientation required a great deal of faith, but I can honestly say that, for me, it has been completely worth it. I have not regretted the decision one day of my life. My life is filled with so much genuine, real, vibrant joy that I would be remiss if I didn’t thank God for blessing me for my obedience and adherence to His guidelines as I understand them. I love the Gospel of Jesus Christ as well as the Mormon Church, which I consider to be His restored organizational unit. I did not want to give that up.

2. I am a traditionalist at heart. I wanted a wife. I wanted to raise children that were biologically the product of me and the one I love. Thankfully, Lolly was willing to marry me, and we found ourselves able to conceive children. I have three incredible daughters. Every moment with them is true joy. Sometimes as I wrestle in the living room with them, or watch them eat cookies with chocolatey mouths and lots of giggles, or read them stories before tucking them into their beds, I’m filled with a sense of such joy that I almost feel bad to have such an incredibly fulfilling life. I often find myself in awe at how amazing my life is, and how lucky I am. And in my opinion, it was more than luck. I believe my joy stems from living the Gospel of Jesus Christ and trusting God and his plan for me even when it was really hard and scary.

3. I love Lolly Shea. (In my mind, she will always be Lolly Shea, the girl that I’ve known since I was three years old.) I want to be with her for the rest of my life. I want to grow old by her side. I wouldn’t trade her for any human on earth, male or female. She is my best friend, my lover, and my greatest gift. I love her with a love that is undeniable, and anyone that knows us can attest to the fact that our love is real, vibrant and very apparent. Besides my relationship with God himself, she is my everything and nothing that I ever do or receive in my life will ever compare to her and her love for me.

I find that when I think of what alternative lifestyles could offer me, they pale in comparison to the full, joyous, bounteous life I live. Thus, I believe that to live my life this way is being true to myself, and to go down any other path would be egregiously inauthentic and self-deceptive.

About two years ago, I saw a psychologist to get medication for my ADHD-I. She was a lesbian, and when I told her that I was a gay man in a heterosexual marriage, she spent an entire session hammering me with questions about my situation in a genuine effort to make sure I was happy. I didn’t love that she did this, but as a clinician myself, I understood where she was coming from.

During our conversation, she told me about her life with her partner. She spoke of a girl, whom she considered her daughter, who is the biological child of her ex-lover, with whom she lived for only three years. She told me of how much she loved her daughter, but how infrequently she got to see her. And eventually, when talking about my sex life, she said “well, that’s good you enjoy sex with your wife, but I think it’s sad that you have to settle for something that is counterfeit.”

I was a little taken aback by this idea—I don’t consider my sex-life to be counterfeit. In response, I jokingly said “and I’m sorry that you have to settle for a counterfeit family.” She immediately saw my point and apologized for that comment. Obviously, I don’t actually think a family with non-biological members is counterfeit in any way. I also don’t feel that my sex-life is counterfeit. They are both examples of something that is different than the ideal. I made that joke to illustrate a point. If you are gay, you will have to choose to fill in the gaps somewhere. She chose to have a family in a way that is different than the ideal. I choose to enjoy sex in a way that is different than the ideal for a gay man. It all comes down to what you choose and why, and knowing what you want for yourself and why you want it. That’s basically what life is all about.

8. Should all gay people who are LDS or Christian choose to marry people of the opposite gender?

I want to make it very clear that while I have found a path that brings me profound joy and that is the right path for me, I don’t endorse this as the only path for somebody who is gay and religious. I will never, ever judge somebody else’s path as being “incorrect” and I know many people who have chosen different paths than myself.

I have two general recommendations:

1. If you know and love somebody who is gay and LDS (or Christian), your job is to love and nothing more. Let go of your impulse to correct them or control them or propel them down the path you think is right for them. Do what you need to do to move past that impulse. Do not condemn the choices your loved one makes. Love. Only love. Show your love in word and deed. Embrace them, both literally and figuratively. I promise they need it—and they need to feel like they can figure out this part of themselves in a safe way without ridicule and judgment. It’s what Christ would do. It’s what your loved one needs. Accept them. Love them. Genuinely and totally.

If you are a parent or guardian, teach them what you know to be true in appropriate moments, with the Spirit. But then let go and let them govern themselves. Trust that they can find their own path. Let them live their life and have the experiences they need to learn and grow. Trust that they are in charge of their own agency and destiny. I promise you they will thank you. I also promise that pressuring them to live the life you want them to lead will only hamper their ability to make a genuine and authentic choice for their own future, be it what you hope for them or not. You will never, ever give your gay loved one a better gift than to love and accept them for who they are, right now, no matter what, period. The friends and family who did that for me (at varying points in my journey, including very recently) are cherished and will go down in the history of my life as the people that truly loved me, and as true Christians who helped me on my path. (And, btw, some of them are not technically even Christian—but to me are like Christ in their actions.)

2. If you are gay and Mormon (or Christian), I want you to know how much love I feel for you, and how much I admire you. I know how hard it is to be where you are. I want you to do me a favor. I want you, right now, to take a deep breath, look in the mirror, and accept yourself as you are in this very instant. You are you. And your attractions are part of you. And you are totally okay! I promise. I want you to stop battling with this part of you that you may have understood as being sinful. Being gay does not mean you are a sinner or that you are evil. Sin is in action, not in temptation or attraction. I feel this is a very important distinction. This is true for every single person. You don’t get to choose your circumstances, but you do get to choose what you do with them.

I want you to know that God loves you, and that even though you are attracted to people of the same gender, you are a completely legitimate individual, worthy of God’s love, your family’s love, and the love of your friends. You are no more broken than any other person you meet. You are not evil. You are a beautiful child of God. Please don’t be ashamed. Know that you can be forgiven for any mistakes you have made, and that God is not judging you. He loves you. Turn to him. He has a plan specifically for you. He wants you to be happy, and he will take you by the hand, and guide you step by step to where you need to be if you trust Him. He is not angry with you, and He knows you completely, every part, even the parts you wish you could keep hidden. He knows it all, and he still loves you! He couldn’t love you any more, and he is proud of you for your courage. I wish you could know of my sincerity as I write these words, and how deeply I feel compassion for you.

Conclusion (finally?)

You might be having an emotional reaction of some kind to this post. We want you to know that that’s okay.

Perhaps you’re someone that has never met a person that is gay whose opinion you trust, and are having trouble believing that a man or woman could actually be sexually attracted to their same gender. Perhaps it’s hard for you to accept the idea that people do not choose to be gay because it has helped you to understand this issue to assume that it is a matter of choice. It’s okay if you feel that way.

Perhaps it is hard for you to believe that a man who regularly has sex with a woman could actually be a homosexual who has chosen to live with a woman he loves, and that there’s no way I could feel what I claim to feel. It’s okay if you feel that way.

Perhaps you are someone who has been affected by a loved one who is gay and got married to a person of the opposite gender under false pretenses and then left his or her family, and your feelings are raw, and this post makes you feel feelings of anger because you worry that anybody in these circumstances is in for an eventual rude awakening and horrible consequences. Perhaps it even makes you feel deeper pain and loss than you already do to imagine that while this type of marriage didn’t work for you or for someone you love, it is working well for someone else, and so it’s easier to dismiss our story as something that is bound to fail. It’s okay if you feel that way.

Perhaps you are someone who has trouble believing a Mormon or Christian could actually be gay, so this post is difficult for you to take at face value. It’s okay if you feel that way.

Perhaps you are someone who is gay, and you once had desires to have a family with biological children of your own, but you gave that dream up long ago, and so now you feel challenged by the idea that doing so is a possibility for you, which makes you resistant to accept that what we are saying could be true—and maybe that makes you angry or upset that we would even suggest this is possible for those who want it. It’s okay if you feel that way.

Perhaps you have had none of these emotions and are totally supportive. Maybe you are even excited to see this being talked about so openly. Or perhaps you have felt something entirely different than anything mentioned.

Wherever you find yourself in your emotions, know that it is okay to feel what you are feeling. This issue is a very complex one and a very emotional one.

But this is a moment where whatever your feelings on the subject may be, you are reading the words of a real live person who is telling the truth. I am not lying to you right now. I have no reason whatsoever to share this with you besides to add a voice to the global discussion so that someone who might feel hopeless and lonely and devoid of role models or voices to trust can find all the information about their options available. I do so at great risk. I do so in spite of probable backlash from people I know as well as perfect strangers. I do so knowing that I will be misunderstood and possibly maligned—called a fraud, and told that my most intimate relationships are a sham. That I might be called Satanic, or told that I am the epitome of self-deception.

But the reason I do this is because I love you, whoever you are, and I want to share my situation so that you can know further truth: I am gay. I am Mormon. I am married to a woman. I am happy every single day. My life is filled with joy. I have a wonderful sex life. And I’ve been married for ten years, and plan to be married for decades more to come to the woman of my dreams.

All of these things are true, whether your mind is allowing you to believe them or not.

There are too many voices of dissent. There are too many voices saying that what I’m doing with my life is impossible. There are too many voices saying I don’t exist. Saying that I am a mirage, or a fake, or an impossibility. And Lolly and I have had our ten wonderful years of isolation, where we have enjoyed the goodness of our love and our life together in private. We have had chances to come out before in loud ways—we’ve been featured anonymously in news stories, been invited to be on radio interviews and documentaries, and were even asked to be on a national talk show. But it wasn’t time. We needed to have those years—ten wonderful years to ourselves, to live outside of any scrutiny, and just be ourselves.

But now we know that it’s time for us to share, and begin a new phase of openness and authenticity. We aren’t sure why, but we both know, without question, that this is what we are supposed to do. Maybe somebody needs to hear our story. Maybe you are that somebody. If so, thank you for reading, and thank you for letting us share this intimate piece of our lives with you.

If you are someone we know in person, we worry you might feel a little hurt about the manner in which you have found out about this. Know that if you feel that this was an abrupt way to find this out, we genuinely apologize. There was simply no way to talk to everyone we love before publishing this post–but we want you to know that the dialogue is open. If you have questions for us, please ask them. We are talking about this now. We won’t be weirded out if you ask us questions. And if you didn’t hear about this personally, it’s not because we don’t love or trust you. We tried to get to everyone, but just ran out of time.

Also, generally, please feel free to use the comment section to discuss this matter if you wish. However, remember that this is our lives you are talking about. Please feel free to say what you need to say, but we would ask that you be respectful of our decisions and the decisions of others if you decide to comment. And if you know someone who could benefit from this post, please share it. You can click share in the upper corner or down below. We want this post to reach anybody it could potentially help.

In closing, when talking to some friends about our situation in preparation for this post, one of them said “It’s almost like we’ve encountered a real live Unicorn!” She was joking of course. She was just saying that they were talking to something that not many encounter. A mythical creature. Someone who is gay, Mormon and married. And then as we told new friends about ourselves in preparation for this post, we told them we were initiating them into “Club Unicorn” because they had now seen something mythical with their very own eyes.

I now extend that invitation to every one of you. I am not a myth. I am real.

I cordially welcome you as the newest member of Club Unicorn.

Obama– Carter 2.0

June 8, 2012 By Editor 1 Comment

President Jimmy Carter promised Hope and Change to an America dragged through the mud by a media feeding frenzy during the Nixon Watergate era.

The left got the white house handed to them, along with the congress, and nothing could stop the wholesale implementation of liberal-progressive policies. Anyone who lived during the Carter administration knows that it was a horrific time in American history.

Carter began his presidency by apologizing for American success, and it wasn’t long before Arabs began slapping him around like the whimp he told them he was.

OPEC decided the US was powerless to oppose them, and they immediately began cutting oil supplies and raising prices. Carter’s response was classic Democrat, demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of global free markets–impose price freezes on gasoline in the US. World oil markets naturally sought out the more lucrative markets and we well recall the gas lines stretching for blocks as Americans waited for hours to get their tanks filled, reminiscent of the Depression Era shortages and rationing schemes.
In grand Neville Chamberlain style Carter immediately tried diplomatic talks with the Soviet Union feeling that thrill going up his leg as the Soviets put their signatures on pieces of paper with him. Of course, while agreeing to limit expansion, the USSR invaded Afghanistan behind his back, bitch-slapping the president of the United States in front of the entire world.

Carter also withdrew US support of the Shah of Iran, historically a strong U.S. ally in the Middle East, one of few who recognized Israel as a sovereign state. Without our support the Shah was forced into exile, replaced by a fundamentalist government, hostile to the U.S. Iranian students stormed the US embassy and took 53 Americans hostages, and held them as political prisoners for 444 days. Carter had been paring back the US military and saw his duty as Commander in Chief as unbecoming a Progressive President, and when it was time to send in a military extraction team to get our hostages out, the equipment failed in one of the greatest military blunders in history. The hostages were kept in Iran and paraded before the world media up until President Elect Ronald Reagan sent Iran the message, “Let my people go,” and they were brushed up and sent back immediately.

Carter, the Apologizer in Chief, also gave up US control of the American-built Panama Canal, affording China and other nations greater access to our easier trade routes, further harming US trade superiority. Seeing no deterrence, the Soviets further expanded their influence in the Western Hemisphere by helping leftists overthrow governments in Central and South America.

Democratic economic strategies had our US economy spiraling in a tailspin, with the prime rate at 21 percent, killing business expansion and the housing market. Of course, unemployment skyrocketed under these circumstances.

DOES ANY OF THIS SOUND FAMILIAR?

This writer has always said that American politics has been reduced to this: The Democrats take control of government based on promises of throwing a big party, and the next morning the Republicans are called in to clean up the mess.

At what point will America wake up to the reality that the policies of the left don’t work? It’s time to install a conservative government, and to keep a conservative government in place . . . and replace the long-term growth, development and expansion of personal liberty that we enjoyed for the first 100 years. Call me old fashioned.

PUBLIUS

Wisconsin Unplugs the Machine

June 6, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Wisconsin is a state like many others in the Midwest, home to working people just trying to live the American dream. In recent decades the state has been heavily influenced by unions, with Democratic political leaders striking sweetheart union deals in the tradition of leftist politics. The scheme is similar to the Harry Hopkins political plan—Tax, Spend, Elect!—only with a middleman inserted between the politician and the treasury; the union boss.

Indeed, like so many states that have handed the reins of government over to union bosses, Wisconsin has become the poster child for union/government collusion to drain the public coffers through graft, corruption, and mandated inefficiency and waste. With a $3.6 billion budget deficit hanging over the state’s head, Wisconsin voters found themselves backed into a corner, and forced to make the ultimate hard choice—vote in a Republican governor to clean up after the party thrown by the Democrats.

Sure, nearly everyone liked things the way they were. High taxes, government over-regulation and unions siphoning the profits off the state’s economy served the purposes of those receiving the money—namely, union bosses, Democratic politicians and their capitalist cronies. They went out every political season and sold their scam to the public, telling them that the “working people” were getting their piece of the pie, and that as long as the status quo was enforced, no one would get hurt.

The $3.6 billion deficit changed the status quo, however, and the voters had to face the reality of the union/government scam. Reluctantly, they brought in Governor Scott Walker and allowed him to do the job that responsible government must do. He and his bare majority in the state capital passed legislation that stripped the most egregious abuses of power from union boss hands. The uproar was heard around the state as militant union thugs “occupied” the capitol building and the streets, while Democrat senators left the state en masse during session to rob the legislature of a quorum to pass its initiatives.

This temper tantrum resulted in tens of millions of dollars in damage to the state, and a recall effort against those who had dared stand up to the corruption that had taken over Wisconsin.

Last night the people of the state spoke. Indeed, in the mere year since Governor Walker and new bare-majority passed their demonized legislation, we discover, yet again, that Republican reality saved the day for Wisconsin, and the crushing debt was eliminated, and tens of thousands of new jobs created.

The political machine that took over our country when unions were allowed into the public employee realm is beginning to cough and sputter. As other states take heart and begin to pull the plug on union/government collusion, we will see similar results—good for states and citizens, and bad for union bosses and Democrats who rely on their forced dues kickbacks to fund populist campaigns.

The Silent Majority is back, and it is taking back its country. The next stop? Washington, D.C., and its union run Democratic Party bosses. We might even take the unions out of teaching, and get our children the educations we are paying for.

PUBLIUS

Obama vs. Catholic Church

May 28, 2012 By Editor 1 Comment

President Barack Hussein Obama’s open war on Christianity was officially launched less than three months into his presidency on April 15, 2009, when he insisted that the gold “IHS” monograms for the name of Christ be covered up with black painted plywood in Gaston Hall at the Catholic church’s Georgetown University, where he delivered a speech on economics. Didn’t that very thing happen in “Damien: Omen II”?

Of course, Barack Obama has always been hostile toward Christianity, and Christian principles, championing anti-Christian causes like gay marriage (although he flipped against it for a few years to get elected, then recently flipped back to rally his base), abortion (which has eliminated tens of millions of American blacks from our population), the poverty and servitude of debt and the government dole, and general principles of immorality (yes, Christianity teaches virtue and honesty). Although he claims to be Christian, when it serves him, his professed brand of “Christianity” is a Black Liberation Theology, which has its roots in Marxism–an anti-Christian philosophy.

Then there was the contrived “war on women” that Obama declared was extant in the conservative camp. Of course, “pro-woman” according to the left necessarily means anti-baby (kill them where they live), anti-child, anti-marriage, anti-family, and anti-virtue (a characteristic becoming of both sexes, but a 4-letter-word to the left). Stay at home mothers “haven’t worked a day in their lives” according to those in the Obama camp, and are unworthy of inclusion in a serious discussion of what women desire in America. Ms. Fluke was paraded out as the poster child for women who demand that the government provide free contraceptives for their extramarital, recreational sex. If conservatives feel that the open availability of contraceptives is sufficient for women, then that just shows how anti-woman they are, according to the Obama camp, because American taxpayers should be burdened with the costs of extramarital recreational sex for law students and other leftist activists who no longer believe in personal virtue before marriage. If Rush Limbaugh dares enumerate the type of women that flaunt premarital recreational sex, then he is necessarily a bigot. How completely Orwellian.

Most recently, when the Catholic Church declared that it was abhorrent to their religious beliefs and practices to provide birth control to Catholic Church employees, as mandated under Obamacare, the administration told them to sit down and shut the hell up, because Obama decides what the church will do, not God and his word. The church has filed suit against the administration, as have the majority of the states in the union who have received similar abuse by a power-mongering administration run amok.

The president and his anti-Christian cronies have done everything they set out to do, and the constitutionality of their acts will be weighed in the balance by Article III courts. The left has waged war against Christianity for several decades, chipping away at the First Amendment with every prohibition of free exercise. Now, they are attacking actual establishments of religion, taking on the largest in the country, with over 60 million members. For those on the left who have no idea where the terms “free exercise” and “establishment of religion” come from, let us provide a brief lesson in Constitutional law:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” First Amendment to the Constitution.

POTUS is not the PONTIFF. The federal government has overreached–again–and its time they got their wings clipped. We urge all Catholics, and all other Christians to vote against Obama’s anti-Christian rampage in the upcoming elections.

PUBIUS

Is Romney’s Religion a Problem?

May 19, 2012 By Editor Leave a Comment

Although most political commentators seem to agree that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith is an off-limits issue in the campaign, there is a definite undercurrent that it could become problematic for him, perhaps in the Christian-fundamentalist “Bible Belt,” or especially if the Democratic media hit squads ignore the “faith” advice of cooler heads and decide to begin strafing the nominee on their own. The backlash risk is one they seem more willing to take with each passing week.

Is the faith of a candidate really an issue that can, or should be considered when deciding fitness for office? In fact, if a belief system takes its possessor too far afield from the beliefs of the average American voter, then it can have an impact (“I was born a snake handler, and I’ll die a snake handler!” Moe Szyslak).

The truth is that the subject of religious faith is of itself a minefield, and must be gingerly navigated under the best of circumstances. Even among those who consider themselves to be Christian, the traditional majority religion of our nation, serious doctrinal divisions exist between the various denominations, and were we to begin throwing epithets at every Christian church that believes differently than our own, a bloody civil war would be the inevitable result.

It used to be that the Mormon Church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—or LDS for short) was thought by some to be non Christian, or a cult. Indeed, a review of the literature of “competing” churches reveals that many Christian ministries in the Bible Belt launched massive campaigns against the LDS faith, printing millions of tracts warning their parishioners not to talk to the Mormons. In retrospect it appears that this assault had more to do with massive numbers of their congregations converting to the LDS faith than actual cult or non Christian beliefs. The LDS Church is now the 4^th largest Christian denomination in the U.S., and most of those converted from other Christian churches. In the 19^th Century American Christian mobs likewise persecuted the early Mormons, murdering them and their leaders, stealing their land and property, raping their wives and daughters, and finally driving them out of the country into the far west where they settled, and built an empire. It was not America’s finest hour.

So what are some aspects of Mormonism that give pause to some Christian ministers? Are there Mormon doctrines that are repugnant to Biblical teachings? As all may know, theology is often a matter of biblical interpretation. For instance, in Roman Catholic theology (the largest American Christian denomination with nearly 70 million members), the doctrine of transubstantiation tells us that in the Eucharist, the substance of wheat bread and grape wine changes into the substance of the body and the blood of Jesus Christ, literally, not figuratively, while all that is accessible to the senses remains unchanged. Is this doctrine true? Does the wheat wafer actually, literally become the physical body of Jesus Christ, the crucified and resurrected Savior? Does the wine actually and literally become the physical blood of Christ? Do Catholics truly eat Christ’s body, and drink his blood during the Eucharist? I do not speculate about the accuracy of the doctrine, but it does set the benchmark by which we can measure the doctrines of other Christian churches, even the LDS Church. Faith is personal, and because it deals with matters that come to individuals spiritually, we are hard pressed to judge their reality until they come to us as well.

The editors have used some very conventional tools to survey the tenets of the LDS religion. We have also checked these tenets against biblical teachings.

What do Mormons believe? Ask one. Go to their website. Read the Book of Mormon. Consider their “I’m a Mormon” ads. They have strong family ties. They believe that God the Father is the Supreme Being and creator. They believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, and that through the atonement he saved all humanity from death. They believe that sex is reserved for marriage. They treat their bodies like temples and don’t partake of harmful substances. They believe in baptism by immersion for the remission of sins. They believe in repentance, and forgiveness. They believe in the resurrection. They believe in communicating with God though the Holy Ghost. They believe in the gifts of the Spirit, including faith, revelation and prophecy. They believe in eventual judgment for unrepentant acts committed against others. They believe in being good neighbors and faithful friends. They believe in education and hard work. They believe in sharing the gospel and a better style of life and send tens of thousands of their young adults on 2 year missions every year.

Are these beliefs biblical? Despite any personal interpretations, we are hard-pressed to find doctrines that are alien or repugnant to the holy writ. Others may interpret biblical passages differently than the Mormons at times, but all the doctrines are present in the Bible. We could even say that the doctrine of transubstantiation is present in the Bible, if one accepts the Catholic interpretation of the Eucharist: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.” Matthew 26:26

So who has knelt before the priest to eat the literal body of Jesus Christ? John F. Kennedy, Rick Santorum, Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, Bobby Jindal, Clarence Thomas, Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Andrew Cuomo, Ted Kennedy, Steve King, Jerry Brown, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nick Clooney, John Kerry, Sargent Shriver, Pat Toomey, Al D’Amato, Geraldine Ferraro, Rudy Giuliani, Carol Moseley Braun, Ken Salazar, Dennis Kucinich, Chris Dodd, Loretta Sanchez, Joe Manchin, Dan Aykroyd, Alan Alda, Samuel Alito, Anne Bancroft, William Brennan Jr., Nicolas Cage, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Frank Capra, Gary Cooper, Francis Ford Coppola, Bing Crosby, Marie Curie, Leonardo da Vinci, Robert De Niro, Faye Dunaway, Clark Gable, Galileo Galilei, Alec Guinness, Arlo Guthrie, Nicole Kidman, Bill Maher, Bill Murray, Napoleon, Robert Novak, Jack Nicholson, Al Pacino, Susan Sarandon, Antonin Scalia, Martin Sheen, Sylvester Stallone, Jon Voight, Spencer Tracy, John Travolta, Andy Warhol, James Woods, and even Oscar Wilde, to name only a few.

Publius

« Previous Page

Older Stories

Older Stories| 2

Older Stories | 3

Older Stories | 4

Older Stories | 5

Recent Comments