Thoughts From A Conservative Mom

Archive for the ‘Intimidation’ Category

Think about it. Out of all the world regimes over the past century, which ones do you think would be most opposed to homeschooling? Nazi Germany, communist Russia, and nations enforcing Islamic Sharia Law first come to mind. And what is the common tie to all of these? Control. Unfortunately, with socialist agendas sweeping the globe, the mindless conformity of youth through indoctrination at government-run schools to the government’s point of view on social, political, and moral issues is a top priority of many nations falsely aspiring for a global community of “tolerance.”

But today, the suppression of parental rights to teach and influence their own children isn’t restricted to overtly fascist regimes. Take a look at Sweden, home of Ikea and Volvos. A couple months ago in June, attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and the Home School Legal Defense Association filed Johansson v. Sweden with the European Court of Human Rights so that that the Swedish government will return a seven-year-old homeschooled boy to his parents. Dominic Johansson was forcibly seized by Swedish authorities from his parents in June 2009 after they had boarded a plane in their move to India. The reason? He was homeschooled. No warrant was issued before taking him into state custody, and the family was charged with no crime. Young Dominic was abducted because officials deemed home instruction to be an unsuitable method of raising a child, insisting that the government knows better about how to rear children.

Dominic is now in foster care and attends a government school. Heartbreakingly, his parents are only allowed to see their son for one hour every five weeks. To “justify” their action, Swedish authorities cited the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, and quite shockingly, the White House and some members of Congress have expressed interest in ratifying this authoritarian treaty so that this type of government control could be exercised on our shores.

Despite the proliferating homeschooling movement in the U.S., with between two and four million children now being taught from home, the education and judicial systems have had a hard time leaving the influence of youth to their parents. Case in point: In the Matter of Kurowski and Kurowski, a legal matter that demonstrates how the courts have leaned toward state influence over parental influence when it comes to the education of children. Following a divorce, the father of 10-year-old homeschooled Amanda Kurowski had second thoughts about his former wife homeschooling their daughter, even though she performed well both socially and academically. The father contended that his daughter’s strong Christian beliefs needed to be sifted and challenged in a public school setting, and the lower court agreed in July 2009, issuing an order for her to enroll in a government-run school and discontinue homeschooling.

Now, of course, sometimes divorced parents do not agree on details of how to raise their child. Courts may rightly be called to resolve such disputes. But a judge must exercise the right standards when called upon to break a deadlock. When a dispute between these parents arose over homeschooling, the court looked past traditional arguments and made the chilling observation that Amanda’s “vigorous defense of her religious beliefs to [her] counselor suggests strongly that she has not had the opportunity to seriously consider any other point of view.” In other words, the court was attempting to say that it knows better than a parent when a child is getting too much religious teaching. Such reasoning goes to show that, even in the U.S., it has become a main priority of public schools to challenge and convert students’ thinking to reflect that of the state, rather than those espoused at home.

Read more at Advancing Religious Liberty

Court orders Christian homeschooled girl to attend public school

California Court Rules Homeschooling Illegal

Swedish court refuses to return homeschool boy to family

US grants home schooling German family political asylum

The Shocking Origins of Public Education

Threat to Parents’ Rights a Bigger Issue than Rights of a Child

States are starting to fight back against unconstitutional power grabs.  God bless Texas!

The state’s slogan is “Don’t mess with Texas.” But the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is doing just that, and at stake is whether the Obama administration can impose its global-warming agenda without a vote of Congress.

President Obama’s EPA is already well down the path to regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, something the act was not designed to do. It has a problem, however, because shoehorning greenhouse gases into that 40-year-old law would force churches, schools, warehouses, commercial kitchens and other sources to obtain costly and time-consuming permits. It would grind the economy to a halt, and the likely backlash would doom the whole scheme.

The EPA, determined to move forward anyway, is attempting to rewrite the Clean Air Act administratively via a “tailoring rule,” which would reduce the number of regulated sources. The problem with that approach? It’s illegal. The EPA has no authority to rewrite the law. To pull it off, the EPA needs every state with a State Implementation Plan to rewrite all of its statutory thresholds as well.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Chairman Bryan W. Shaw saw the tailoring rule for what it really is: a massive power grab and centralization of authority. They are fighting back, writing to the EPA:

“In order to deter challenges to your plan for centralized control of industrial development through the issuance of permits for greenhouse gases, you have called upon each state to declare its allegiance to the Environmental Protection Agency’s recently enacted greenhouse gas regulations – regulations that are plainly contrary to U.S. laws. … To encourage acquiescence with your unsupported findings you threaten to usurp state enforcement authority and to federalize the permitting program of any state that fails to pledge their fealty to the Environmental Protection Agency. On behalf of the State of Texas, we write to inform you that Texas has neither the authority nor the intention of interpreting, ignoring or amending its laws in order to compel the permitting of greenhouse gas emissions.”

Texas leaders are doing what Congress so far has been unable to do (a Senate vote to stop the EPA’s global-warming power grab got just 47 votes on June 10): take on the EPA. Good thing, because Texas would be hit especially hard by these regulations.

Federalist principles have allowed Texas to become the strongest state in the union. The Lone Star State leads the nation in job creation, is the top state for business relocation and has more Fortune 500 companies than any other state and is the top state for wind generation. President Obama said he wants to double U.S. exports in five years; he could look to Texas, as we are the top exporting state in the country. The Obama administration could learn a lot from Texas.

Instead, it is attempting to ride roughshod over Texas, and it goes beyond the greenhouse-gas issue.

Read more at the Washington Times

The Marxists see their agenda and puppet politicians being challenged by everyday Americans, and they’re rallying the troops!  Do we have to resolve to meet them?

The Wall Street Journal reports:

The leaders of the AFL-CIO and the Service Employees International Union have agreed to coordinate spending millions of dollars in the midterm elections to support pro-union candidates, most of them Democrats.

The two labor organizations say they have a combined $88 million or more to deploy in this year’s election cycle. It’s not clear how much of that money they will pool together.

The renewed alliance between the two big labor groups comes as Democrats are battling to retain control of both houses of Congress. The AFL-CIO and SEIU plan to target elections in 26 states, all but five of which they consider battleground territory, including California, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio, [and Oregon].

The SEIU, with 1.8 million members, says it has budgeted $44 million, up 26% from 2006.

Most of the SEIU’s $44 million comes from the 300,000 of its members who donate $7 monthly to the union political-action committee.

Turnout is a critical concern for union leaders.

“The enthusiasm gap isn’t just with the public,” said SEIU national political director Jon Youngdahl. “It’s with our members as well.”

Union leaders have expressed disappointment with some Democratic leaders for failing to push harder to pass pro-union legislation. This was one of the reasons the AFL-CIO’s Arkansas affiliate last week voted not to support Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D., Ark.) for re-election.

To counter any possible apathy, Mr. Trumka said the unions planned to put more campaign workers in the field than in 2006 and 2008, knocking on doors of union households and handing out leaflets at work sites. The federation also will coordinate phone banks and mailings, tracking progress through weekly polls.

Michelle Malkin observes:

As I’ve noted over the last two years, it’s going to take a bottom-up revolt by disgusted rank-and-file members to stop the political raid on worker dues.

In the words of Thomas Jefferson: “To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

She also unearthed this scandalous gem:

In related news, from the Marxist People’s World , comes news of an radical joint get-out-the-vote effort with the AFL-CIO:

The AFL-CIO executive committee voted unanimously this morning to join One Nation, Working Together, a new national coalition of labor and civil rights groups that has as its purpose to “reorder America’s priorities by investing in the nation’s most valuable resource – its people.”

The labor, civil rights, environmental, faith and other organizations that have formed the new coalition intend to replace unemployment and economic crisis faced by the country’s majority with “nothing less than a future of shared prosperity for all our people,” the AFL-CIO said in a statement after it voted to join One Nation.

“None of us alone have been able to achieve our priorities,” said Richard Trumka, president of the AFL-CIO.

One Nation’s first official act as a coalition will be a march on Washington on Oct. 2, which unions say will energize an army of tens of thousands who will return to their neighborhoods, churches, schools and voting booths to prevent a Republican takeover of Congress in November and begin building a new permanent coalition to fight for a progressive agenda.

AFL-CIO targets Oregon in fall campaigns

What Do Workers Do When Union Bosses’ Political Agendas Don’t Reflect Their Own?

This is so true. To the Left, anybody who holds an opposite opinion is automatically a “hater”.  They can’t conceive that anyone might actually have a legitimate, principled reason to disagree. Whereas, “conservatives can say ‘There are good people on both sides of the issue’ because we actually believe it.”

I recently wrote about leftists’ hatred for conservatives as people, not merely for conservative ideas. Demonization of opponents is a fundamental characteristic of the left. It is not merely tactical; they believe people on the right are bad. (Here’s a test: Ask someone on the left if active support of California Proposition 8 — retaining the man-woman definition of marriage — was an act of hate.)

A related defining characteristic of the left is the ascribing of nefarious motives to conservatives. For the left, a dismissal of conservatives’ motives is as important as is dismissal of the conservatives as people. It is close to impossible for almost anyone on the left — and I mean the elite left, not merely left-wing blogs — to say “There are good people on both of sides of this issue.” From Karl Marx to Frank Rich of The New York Times, this has always been the case.

In the left’s worldview, conservative opponents of affirmative action cannot be driven by concern for blacks — opposition is animated by racists; conservative opponents of illegal immigration are animated by racism and xenophobia; opposition to abortion is a function of sexism; President Bush went to war for oil and American imperialism; and conservative supporters of retaining man-woman marriage hate gays.

This is not true of elite conservatives. Leading conservative columnists, leading Republicans, etc., rarely depict liberals as motivated by evil. Conservatives can say “There are good people on both sides of the issue” because we actually believe it.

Why does the left attribute only nefarious motives to those who believe that the Islamic center does not belong near ground zero?

Because leftism holds these beliefs:

1. Those who hold leftist positions are, by definition, better people than their opponents.

2. Those who hold leftist positions have, by definition, pure motives; therefore, the motives of their opponents must be impure.

Read more at Real Clear Politics

Why the left hates conservatives

The World Doesn’t Hate America, the Left Does

The Original Tea Party

View on YouTube

The Civil War and Gilded Age

View on YouTube

Progressivism

View on YouTube

FDR’s State And LBJ’s Society

View on YouTube

Big Gov’t and Tea Parties

View on YouTube

The Constitution and Freedom

Woodrow Wilson and the roots of Progressivism

Barack Obama and “The Second Bill of Rights”

America’s Ruling Class – And the Perils of Revolution

We the Serfs

WHO has changed how the constitution is interpreted?

View on YouTube

“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced –a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.“   – From ICLEI‘s “Agenda 21“, signed by G.H. Bush, 1992

One reason that Portland is so hell-bent on pursuing unsustainable “sustainability” projects is that they’ve signed an ICLEI agreement to reduce carbon emissions by up to 80%, making themselves accountable to an international body of radical environmentalists who don’t have to live with the results at the local level.

Agenda 21 and the United Nations

Freedom Advocates explains the danger:

Right now, in your town and neighborhood, policies are being implemented that will ultimately eliminate your freedoms and destroy your way of life. You need to know what’s going on to stop this process. Many town officials are selling us out to global regional development with help from the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI): Local Governments for Sustainability. ICLEI is used as one of the mechanisms to undo the political recognition of unalienable rights.

ICLEI uses the false premise and outright lies of anthropogenic* global warming to change our way of life, for the worse!

ICLEI: Local Governments for Sustainability promotes Local Action 21, Local Agenda 21 and other United Nations programmes implemented through local town councils, planners, mayors and local governments.

Why should you care?

Social engineering and behavior modification are some of the true objectives being implemented under the guise of environmental and climate protection. This is accomplished by exploiting people’s desire to maintain a healthy and lasting environment in the name of “sustainability.” Here is an example of how ICLEI changes behavior, jut like another organization called “Fostering Sustainable Behavior”.

It is also ICLEI’s job to implement United Nation’s policies that restructure our representative form of government through global and regional development (< click and then view slide show). Policies and programs take control from our representative government and put it into the hands of regional, non-elected boards.  This allows elected officials to shirk their responsibilities. It turns us into a soviet system that is based on Regionalism.  It facilitates both communism and fascism. Representative government with defined limits is the basis of a free and just society.

Cool Mayors Fire-up Hot Debate

ICLEI methods include infiltrating local government. Organization representatives seek to be hired into local planning departments or they provide “toolkits” to staff. Too many elected officials such as Cool Mayors allow ICLEI to influence policy changes through the use of funding incentives and rewards. While some of these policies sound good on the surface, they result in consequences such as:

• High-density housing scams
• Traffic congestion
• Open space where access is not allowed
• Government “partnering” with favored private businesses and non-profit agencies, using your tax money
• Undermining Constitutional administration of government
• Managed control over your life
• Mismanagement of public utilities
• Prohibitions on natural resource management leading to increased fire hazards, lack of water, and private property restrictions,
• Increased taxes, fees, regulations and restrictions

Is ICLEI running your town or coming to a town near you?

Are your elected officials being lured into enacting ridiculous rules and regulations in exchange for funding?  Do your elected officials know that there are long term consequences to their irresponsible actions?

Currently there are more than 550 communities in North America paying membership dues to ICLEI.  Upon becoming a member of ICLEI, members become governed by ICLEI Charter. If your community is one of these, you are paying for the loss of your unalienable rights.

Has your town, city or county signed on with ICLEI?  Find out here.

Patriot and AFP activist Roxanne Ross wrote an editorial on page 7 of the August edition of the Northwest Connection about how the ICLEI agenda threatens Multnomah county.

ICLEI is behind national schemes, as well:

How Obama is Locking Up Our Land

And now: The stealth Obama ocean grab

David Horowitz on Democrats’ Shadow Cabinet and the Green Communists

Global Warming Alarmism is a Grave Threat to our Liberty

Environmentalism: The New Communism

Does anyone find it ironic that the very people who protest so loudly over supposed affronts to Islamic religious expression are often so hostile to the slightest Christian religious expressions — even incidental expressions?

The left is going bonkers over opposition to the ground zero mosque in the name of religious freedom, but the left’s assault on Christian liberties proceeds unabated. One very recent example is the ruling by a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that memorial crosses erected and displayed along Utah public roads to honor fallen state highway troopers must be removed as unconstitutional.

In case you are wondering how highway crosses could remotely be considered to have violated any constitutional provision, the court tells us: “We hold that these memorials have the impermissible effect of conveying to the reasonable observer the message that the state prefers or otherwise endorses a certain religion.”

So here we go again. Our politically correct-intoxicated culture is so allergic to expressions and symbols of Christianity that our courts leap to absurd conclusions to cordon off the chief allergen: Christianity.

To fully appreciate the outrageousness of the court’s decision, you must understand that the memorial crosses were placed along Utah public roads by a private — not public — organization, the Utah Highway Patrol Association, which also maintains the crosses.

The egregious constitutional infraction here is not that the government put up the signs, which it didn’t, but that the memorials were placed along public roads. Thus, “reasonable” passing motorists — as opposed, I guess, to those afflicted with anti-Christian road rage — might well assume that the government is endorsing the Christian religion. Horror of horrors. My gosh, what would the largely Christian Founders think?

Read more at Human Events

Federal Appeals Court Rules Against Utah Memorial Crosses Along Highway

View on YouTube

Why don’t they start with investigating who’s funding this multi-level monument to radical Islam?   Hamas, a terrorist organization, has come out publicly in support.   Are they not the least bit interested in whether terrorists are funding it? 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is suggesting a coordinated effort is behind the opposition to a proposed mosque and community center near Ground Zero, saying the whole dispute has been “ginned up” for political purposes and she supports a probe into those opponents. 

Commenting publicly for the first time on the Park 51 project, Pelosi said the issue was posing a distraction and that some organized force is behind it. 

“There is no question that there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some,” she said in remarks posted Tuesday in a video on the San Francisco Chronicle website. “And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque (is) being funded.” 

Read more at Fox News

Pelosi supports probe of mosque opponents

Feds funding Ground Zero imam’s Mideast trip

The President Distorts Arguments on Ground Zero Mosque

Ground Zero Mosque: An Islamic Victory?

“Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.” ~ Ronald Reagan

View on YouTube

Here come the food police – literally!

When the 20 agents arrived bearing a search warrant at her Ventura County farmhouse door at 7 a.m. on a Wednesday a couple weeks back, Sharon Palmer didn’t know what to say. This was the third time she was being raided in 18 months, and she had thought she was on her way to resolving the problem over labeling of her goat cheese that prompted the other two raids. (In addition to producing goat’s milk, she raises cattle, pigs, and chickens, and makes the meat available via a CSA.)

But her 12-year-old daughter, Jasmine, wasn’t the least bit tongue-tied. “She started back-talking to them,” recalls Palmer. “She said, ‘If you take my computer again, I can’t do my homework.’ This would be the third computer we will have lost. I still haven’t gotten the computers back that they took in the previous two raids.”

As part of a five-hour-plus search of her barn and home, the agents — from the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s office, Los Angeles County Sheriff, Ventura County Sheriff, and the California Department of Food and Agriculture — took the replacement computer, along with milk she feeds her chickens and pigs.
 
While no one will say officially what the purpose of this latest raid was, aside from being part of an investigation in progress, what is very clear is that government raids of producers, distributors, and even consumers of nutritionally dense foods appear to be happening ever more frequently. Sometimes they are meant to counter raw dairy production, other times to challenge private food organizations over whether they should be licensed as food retailers.

What’s behind all these raids? They seem to stem from increasing concern at both the state and federal level about the spread of private food groups that have sprung up around the country in recent years — food clubs and buying groups to provide specialized local products that are generally unavailable in groceries, like grass-fed meats, pastured eggs, fermented foods, and, in some cases, raw dairy products. Because they are private and limited to consumers who sign up for membership, these groups generally avoid obtaining retail and public health licenses required of retailers that sell to the general public. (For more on what’s behind the raids, see this new post.)

Read more at Grist

S510 Vote Delayed, But Not Defeated

Food freedom under attack

The FDA vs Raw Milk and the Constitution

Delia Lopez: Our government has gone Gestapo

The Oregon Consumers and Farmers Association endorses Delia Lopez for Congress

You know you’re making a difference when Obama views you as enough of a threat to start launching his Alinskyite smear tactics on you, by name!  

Here are the choice excerpts from Obama’s speech in Austin, Texas:

Right now all around this country there are groups with harmless-sounding names like Americans for Prosperity, who are running millions of dollars of ads against Democratic candidates all across the country.  And they don’t have to say who exactly the Americans for Prosperity are.  You don’t know if it’s a foreign-controlled corporation.  You don’t know if it’s a big oil company, or a big bank.  You don’t know if it’s a insurance company that wants to see some of the provisions in health reform repealed because it’s good for their bottom line, even if it’s not good for the American people.

Actually, Obama, it’s not that hard to figure out who we are.  Just show up at any meeting – if you have the guts – and you’ll discover it’s full of patriotic Americans and first-time activists who were motivated to get off the bench and do something to save this country before you ”fundamentally transform” it into your version of a perverse socialist utopia! 

Last winter our local AFP group met in a church that was willing to donate the space though they couldn’t afford to turn the heat on.  We stayed in our overcoats for most of our meetings and took a small collection from our own pockets to help cover the cost of running the heater for next time.   No corporate funding for us – just everyday Americans who are FED UP with your policies and ready to fight for our liberties!

And as for accusing us of hiding behind “innocent sounding names” – that’s a RIOT coming from you!  An entire website, Discover The Networks, is dedicated to helping untangle and expose your corrupt web of front groups, subgroups and funding sources hiding behind thousands of  ”innocent sounding names”.   Talk about projection! 

A Supreme Court decision allowed this to happen.  And we tried to fix it, just by saying disclose what’s going on, and making sure that foreign companies can’t influence our elections. Seemed pretty straightforward.  The other side said no.

Same old worn-out playbook: if you repeat a lie often enough, people will start to believe it.  Democrats are so predictable.

They don’t want you to know who the Americans for Prosperity are, because they’re thinking about the next election.  But we’ve got to think about future generations.  We’ve got to make sure that we’re fighting for reform.  We’ve got to make sure that we don’t have a corporate takeover of our democracy.

Actually, we want everyone to know EXACTLY who Americans for Prosperity are!  Thanks for the free plug! 

AFP President Tim Phillips responds:

The President and his friends on the Left are back to accusing you and me of being front groups for “foreign-controlled corporations” or for “big banks” or a “big oil company” – the President personally denigrates the integrity of over 1,200,000 Americans just because he’s angry that we’re taking an effective stand against his liberal policies.

How sad. How outrageous.

Across the nation, literally thousands of our fellow Americans are turning out for our November is Coming bus tour events and grassroots training sessions. I was in Michigan earlier this week and across Pennsylvania last week. The atmosphere is electric. CLICK HERE for pictures of these events and our upcoming schedule.

The President is right about one thing – Americans for Prosperity is running ads across the nation urging Americans to call their member of Congress to tell him or her that they better stop supporting big government legislation like the health care takeover, cap-and-tax, and yet more big bloated spending. CLICK HERE TO SEE SOME OF THESE ADS.

President Obama can continue his attacks but that won’t change the fact that November is Coming. Commit today to doing your part to make sure our fellow Americans send a powerful message to our fellow citizens and to Congress on behalf of freedom and prosperity. You can knock on doors, call citizens, become a neighborhood leader and so much more. CLICK HERE to sign up for our November is Coming efforts.

Take heart — the President is attacking us by name. He knows, and the Left knows, we are making a crucial difference.

Tell us your story about your grassroots activism by clicking here. We’ll share the stories and let Obama and the Left know you’re not “big oil” or “big banks”.

Let’s keep fighting because much lies ahead.

Join the fight with Americans For Prosperity!

Obama’s Unpresidential Attack On Dissenting Citizens

Attacks and smears of Tea Party more likely to energize it

Troubled Asset Relief Program Inspector General Neal M. Barofsky has found that many of the General Motors and Chrysler dealerships ordered closed by the Obama administration, after last year’s bailouts, were victims of out-and-out, blatant, racial, gender and even political bias.

According to Barofsky’s report, 2,000 dealerships were forced to close, which cost 100,000 jobs.

(See the entire 45-page report here. Read all of it. It is very blunt.)

However, the businesses allowed to stay open “were retained because they were recently appointed, were key wholesale parts dealers, or were minority-or woman-owned dealerships.”

The report also indicates a political bias may have come into play, due to a disproportionate number of dealership closings in rural areas, even though the closures could “jeopardize the return to profitability” for both GM and Chrysler.

Barofsky states: “ultimately close to half of all of the GM dealerships identified for termination were in rural areas.”

Of course, in 2008, Obama lost the vote in the nation’s 1,300 rural counties by close to 80 percent.

Perhaps, most troubling of all was the statement made last week, to American Thinker magazine by Obama’s manufacturing czar, Ron Bloom, that the dealerships could have been kept open, “but that doing so would have been inconsistent with the President’s mandate for ‘shared sacrifice.’”

With this report, we witness yet another example of institutional racism by the Obama administration. While we know that Obama is willing to sit by and allow the New Black Panthers to intimidate white voters to stay away from the polls on election day, we now see that he is also willing to take away one’s livelihood, based on the color of their skin.

Read more at Uncoverage

Dealer: Chrysler shutdowns are unfair

Obama closes successful dealerships for political reasons

The most dangerous president in history

What will it take for the media to acknowledge that the Tea Party is not a racist movement, and that liberals have smeared it as such in a naked politicization of race relations? How about a lefty activist admitting just that.

UPenn professor Mary Frances Berry, a leader of the “far-left black political scene,” as NB Executive Editor Matt Sheffield wrote,  penned this astonishing email to Politico, published on July 20:

Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness. 

Dick Armey could not have said it better.

The strategy is, of course, reprehensible, but members of the Tea Party movement have long suspected that accusations of racism were nothing more than elements of a political ploy motivated by a fear that the movement’s influence could spell disaster for Democrats in November and beyond.

Rather than discuss the issues, these smear artists allege racism since it immediately puts political opponents on the defensive, preventing them from pushing lines of argument to which most Americans are sympathetic.

Read more at NewsBusters

Tea Party Is Dealt The Race Card

Stop The Haters: Black Conservatives Respond

This is not an isolated incident. It’s a coordinated effort to isolate anyone who won’t toe the ideological line.

They want to dominate all professions that have influence on social policy – science (Darwinism, global warming, abortion), education (indoctrination, historical revisionism), law (judicial activism, constitutional revisionism), and now psychology (normalizing deviant behaviors, destroying and redefiining the family as a societal construct).

A federal judge has ruled in favor of a public university that removed a Christian student from its graduate program in school counseling over her belief that homosexuality is morally wrong. Monday’s ruling, according to Julea Ward’s attorneys, could result in Christian students across the country being expelled from public university for similar views.

“It’s a very dangerous precedent,” Jeremy Tedesco, legal counsel for the conservative Alliance Defense Fund, told FOX News Radio. “The ruling doesn’t say that explicitly, but that’s what is going to happen.”

U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh dismissed Ward’s lawsuit against Eastern Michigan University. She was removed from the school’s counseling program last year because she refused to counsel homosexual clients.

The university contended she violated school policy and the American Counseling Association code of ethics.

“Christian students shouldn’t be expelled for holding to and abiding by their beliefs,” said ADF senior counsel David French. “To reach its decision, the court had to do something that’s never been done in federal court: uphold an extremely broad and vague university speech code.”

Read more at Fox News

University expels Christian student for not supporting homosexuality

Christian student fights for her beliefs

Want to Teach? Toe the Ideological Line!

Lesbian opposes special protections for any group, including homosexuals

One News Now reports:

A counseling student has filed suit against a university in Georgia because she claims the school is forcing her to abandon her Christian beliefs in order to receive a degree.

Jennifer Keeton, 24, is pursuing her master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State University. But after her professors learned of her biblical beliefs — specifically her views on homosexual conduct — from both classroom discussions and private conversations with other students, the school imposed a “remediation plan.”
 
“It’s in essence [telling her] ‘you do not have the correct beliefs, we are going to re-educate you into the correct beliefs,’” explains David French, senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund. “And unless she completes this — quote — ‘remediation plan’ to their satisfaction, then she can be thrown out of [the school's counseling program].”

French tells OneNewsNow there are some absurd elements to the plan. “Such as admonishing her to go to — quote — a ‘gay-pride parade’ and write about her feelings after she’s been,” he describes. “In other words, [the school's plan would be] deliberately exposing her to behavior that she finds immoral in the hope that she’ll accept it. It’s ridiculous.”
 
French calls it “pure thought reform” and accuses Augusta State of outlining “a program of indoctrination” for Keeton.
 
“Jennifer is not interested in being indoctrinated, she wants to be educated,” states the attorney. “She wants to learn about the counseling profession, she wants to be a good counselor — but being a good counselor does not require that one surrender their most fundamental religious beliefs.”
 
And so French says Keeton is filing suit [PDF] to get the school to respect her First Amendment rights. “A public university student shouldn’t be threatened with expulsion for being a Christian and refusing to publicly renounce her faith, but that’s exactly what’s happening here,” he concludes.

Augusta State Univ. to Counseling Student: Change Beliefs or Get Out

The Agenda to Silence Christians

The High Cost of College and What it Does to Your Children

How Radical Professors Indoctrinate Students

The Democrats are depressed about their collapsing poll numbers, so it’s time to start calling conservatives “racist.”

As we now know from the Journolist list-serv, where hundreds of liberal journalists chat with one another, and which was leaked to Daily Caller this week, journalists cry “racism” whenever they need to distract from bad news for Obama. (Ironically, this story did not make headlines.)

This is what “racism” has come to in America. Democrats are in trouble, so they say “let’s call conservatives racists.” We always knew it, but the Journolist postings gave us the smoking gun.

Read more at Human Events

“Call Them Racists”: How “journolists” tried to suppress the news

Tea Party Is Dealt The Race Card